MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

GENETIC ARCHITECTURE AND ADAPTIVE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SELFING SYNDROME IN<i>CAPSELLA</i>

2011· article· en· W1942561577 on OpenAlexafffund
Tanja Slotte, Khaled M. Hazzouri, David L. Stern, Peter Andolfatto, Stephen Wright

Bibliographic record

VenueEvolution · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsSelfingBiologyOutcrossingGenetic architectureEvolutionary biologyPopulationOutbreeding depressionInbreedingGeneticsEcologyQuantitative trait locusGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The transition from outcrossing to predominant self-fertilization is one of the most common evolutionary transitions in flowering plants. This shift is often accompanied by a suite of changes in floral and reproductive characters termed the selfing syndrome. Here, we characterize the genetic architecture and evolutionary forces underlying evolution of the selfing syndrome in Capsella rubella following its recent divergence from the outcrossing ancestor C. grandiflora. We conduct genotyping by multiplexed shotgun sequencing and map floral and reproductive traits in a large (N= 550) F2 population. Our results suggest that in contrast to previous studies of the selfing syndrome, changes at a few loci, some with major effects, have shaped the evolution of the selfing syndrome in Capsella. The directionality of QTL effects, as well as population genetic patterns of polymorphism and divergence at 318 loci, is consistent with a history of directional selection on the selfing syndrome. Our study is an important step toward characterizing the genetic basis and evolutionary forces underlying the evolution of the selfing syndrome in a genetically accessible model system.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.163
Teacher spread0.135 · 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

Citations95
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvolutionSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207