MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6941113471 · doi:10.1139/cjps10144

Bhishaj soft white spring wheat

2011· article· en· W6941113471 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueBioOne Complete (BioOne) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpring (device)CultivarStrawStem rustWhite (mutation)Grain qualityFusariumTest weight

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Randhawa, H. S., Sadasivaiah, R. S., Graf, R. J. and Beres, B. L. 2011. Bhishaj soft white spring wheat Can. J. Plant Sci. 91: 805-810. Bhishaj is a soft white spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) that meets the end-use quality specifications of the Canada Western Soft White Spring class. Bhishaj is well-adapted to the wheat growing regions of southern Alberta and southern Saskatchewan. Based on data from the Western Soft White Spring Wheat Cooperative Registration Test from 1999 to 2001 and 2006 to 2009, Bhishaj exhibited high grain yield, mid-season maturity, semi-dwarf stature with moderate straw strength, and good resistance to shattering. Bhishaj expressed resistance to the prevalent races of leaf rust, stripe rust and powdery mildew, intermediate response to loose smut, susceptibility to stem rust, common bunt, and Fusarium head blight. Based on end-use quality analysis performed at the Grain Research Laboratory of the Canadian Grain Commission, Bhishaj had similar milling and baking performance as the check cultivars AC Reed and AC Phil.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.004

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 head0.320
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.103 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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