MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1941357300 · doi:10.4141/cjps10112

Quantitative trait loci analysis of seed coat color components for selective breeding in chickpea (<i>Cicer arietinum</i>L.)

2011· article· en· W1941357300 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shanoor Hossain, Joe Panozzo, C. Pittock, Rebecca Ford

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGenetic and Environmental Crop Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian Research Council
KeywordsQuantitative trait locusCoatBiologyTraitHueGenetic linkageAgronomyGeneticsGeneArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hossain, S., Panozzo, J. F., Pittock, C. and Ford, R. 2011. Quantitative trait loci analysis of seed coat color components for selective breeding in chickpea (Cicer arietinumL.). Can. J. Plant Sci. 91: 49–55. Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) is an annual grain legume, grown worldwide for human consumption with the potential to attract premium prices in markets such as India, Bangladesh and southern Asia. The ability to accurately select for seed coat color, an important export quality trait, would greatly benefit chickpea breeding programs. In order to determine the major genomic loci governing the color trait, the color components of CIE L* (luminance), CIE a* (red/green color) and CIE b* (blue/yellow color), C* (chroma or saturation of the color) and h° (hue or purity of the color) were mapped, and associated molecular markers were identified. A linkage map was constructed with 80 SSR markers distributed over 10 linkage groups at an average marker density of 2.8 cM. Two major quantitative trait loci (QTL), which accounted for up to 36 and 49% of the genetic variance and several smaller genetic effects were determined to govern the color components. These were consistent across two differing environments. Once validated, the markers that are close to and flanking these QTL and significantly associated with the minor gene effects will be useful in future color selective 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 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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.378
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.160 · 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 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

Citations18
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant ScienceSame topicGenetic and Environmental Crop StudiesFrench-language works237,207