MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415782123 · doi:10.1007/s11032-025-01609-6

Hyperspectral imaging of grains uncovers the genetic architecture of nitrogen response of development in bread wheat

2025· article· en· W4415782123 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Qiang Liu, Yinyin Zhang, Jiawei Shi, Wanneng Yang, Hui Feng, Weijuan Hu

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Breeding · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWheat and Barley Genetics and Pathology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of Genetics and Developmental Biology, Chinese Academy of SciencesChinese Academy of SciencesInstitute of GeneticsNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsHyperspectral imagingGenetic architectureNitrogenPlant physiologyArchitecture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unraveling the genetic architecture of nitrogen response of development is critical for improving wheat productivity while reducing nitrogen inputs. In this study, hyperspectral imaging (HSI) was applied to wheat grains obtained from nitrogen-deficient and normal conditions, combined with genome-wide association studies (GWAS), to investigate the nitrogen response of development in a diverse wheat panel. The 1,792 i-traits were acquired via hyperspectral imaging system, which reflect detailed phenotypic assessments of wheat development, capturing subtle variations in nitrogen response. A total of 3,556 significant loci and 3,648 candidate genes were identified. Key candidate genes involved in nitrogen uptake and utilization were identified by integrating agronomic traits with i-traits, including TaARE1-7A, TaPTR9-7B, TaNAR2.1, and Rht-B1 . This approach underscores the potential of combining HSI on grains with GWAS to dissect complex traits like nitrogen response, offering valuable genetic insights for breeding nitrogen-efficient wheat varieties and enhancing sustainability in crop production.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular BreedingSame topicWheat and Barley Genetics and PathologyFrench-language works237,207