Redundancy and distinctness in flax germplasm as revealed by RAPD dissimilarity
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Molecular characterization of ex situ plant germplasm, although more attainable than before, has rarely been applied to a whole germplasm collection of 2000 accessions or larger. The benefits of screening large numbers of accessions have not been well recognized for germplasm management and utilization. Challenges also exist in identifying duplicated and genetically related accessions and in validating developed core subsets. Here we show how a new approach using an average marker-based dissimilarity of an accession in a collection can be applied to identify both redundancy and distinctness in a plant germplasm collection. Application of this dissimilarity measure to 2727 flax accessions genotyped by 149 randomly amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) markers revealed that up to 22% of accessions could be deemed to be redundant. Up to 500 of the most distinct flax accessions were identified and these can be directly screened for traits of interest to broaden the genetic base in a flax improvement programme. These results demonstrate that molecular screening of a large number of accessions with an informative diversity analysis can facilitate the management and utilization of ex situ plant germplasm.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it