MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6940512676 · doi:10.1139/cjps2012-262

Emerson hard red winter wheat

2013· article· en· W6940512676 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueBioOne Complete (BioOne) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWinter wheatCultivarStem rustButeoGrain yieldRust (programming language)FusariumBushelYield (engineering)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Graf, R. J., Beres, B. L., Laroche, A., Gaudet, D. A., Eudes, F., Pandeya, R. S., Badea, A. and Randhawa, H. S. 2013. Emerson hard red winter wheat. Can. J. Plant Sci. 93: 741-748. Emerson hard red winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), a cultivar developed using doubled haploid technology, was registered for western Canadian production in 2012. It is eligible for grades of the Canada Western Red Winter (CWRW) wheat market class. Evaluation across western Canada from 2008 to 2010 was relative to CDC Osprey, AC Bellatrix, Radiant, and CDC Buteo, the CWRW wheat checks in the Western Winter Wheat Cooperative Registration trials. Overall, Emerson had significantly lower grain yield than the mean of these checks; however, in the stem rust, leaf rust and fusarium head blight prone eastern prairies the grain yield of Emerson was not significantly different from CDC Buteo and CDC Falcon, which have been the predominant cultivars in this region. Emerson had good winter survival, intermediate maturity, medium height, strong straw, high test weight, and high grain protein concentration. It expressed improved resistance to fusarium head blight, stem rust, leaf rust, and stripe rust relative to the checks. End-use suitability analysis indicated that Emerson had strong dough rheology, and excellent milling and baking properties.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.694
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

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)0.0590.014

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 head0.242
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.022 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioOne Complete (BioOne)Same topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant InteractionsFrench-language works237,207