Phenological Study and Effect of Two Pollination Techniques on Groundnut Fruiting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Arachis hypogaea Linné is an annual legume and is one of the most widely cultivated oilseeds in West Africa and even worldwide for its high oil content. However, the floral phenology of groundnut accessions and their typology are not fully known. Similarly, the reliable manual pollination technique used to cross-breed elite genotypes of Arachis hypogea is not sufficiently well known. With a view to improving the local yield of this crop, the present study was conducted to assess the morphological diversity of six accessions linked to floral biology, and to evaluate two manual pollination techniques A and B. The results showed morphological variability within accessions. Thus, except for flower length, the other characters (flower width; number of flowers per peduncle; time between flower bloom and pod maturity) significantly differentiated the 6 groundnut accessions. Then, accessions PA1-19, PA1-21, PA8-1, PA12-5, P12-7 and PA17-2 were differentiated by the four characters reflecting floral phenology. Technique B was more effective than technique A, with success rates of 61.35% and 42.04% respectively. This superiority of technique B could be explained by the presence of the carina during pollination. The combination of morphological and phenological floral characteristics showed that accessions PA1-21 and PA1-19 performed better. These accessions could be used in crosses based on the manual pollination technique identified, to create high-performance groundnut hybrids in Côte d’Ivoire.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".