Accelerated Screening of Wheat Gluten Strength Using Dual Physicochemical Tests in Diverse Breeding Lines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introducing fast, reliable, and low-input technologies that utilize wholemeal wheat is essential for efficiently screening gluten quality in wheat breeding lines. Although the GlutoPeak Tester (GPT) has been widely studied for gluten assessment, its application in breeding programs remains underexplored. This study presents a comprehensive approach to optimizing a GPT protocol using a diverse set of genotypes collected over seven harvest years and multiple environments. To improve screening capabilities, a quick and simple protein fractionation (PF) technique was integrated into the workflow. Key GPT parameters-such as peak maximum time, maximum torque, and aggregation energy-along with the newly proposed PM-AM parameter, showed strong correlations with established quality traits. PF data, especially insoluble glutenin percentage and the ratio of insoluble to soluble glutenin, provided additional insights into gluten composition. This extensive dataset supports the use of GPT and PF as a dual, high-throughput screening tool. When applied within specific wheat classes and benchmarked against established checks, this method offers a robust strategy for ranking breeding lines based on gluten performance. The use of wholemeal samples further streamlines the process by eliminating the need for milling, making this protocol particularly suitable for early-stage selection in wheat breeding programs.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".