MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970145122 · doi:10.1139/g2012-039

Validation of microsatellite markers for cytotype discrimination in the model grass <i>Brachypodium distachyon</i>

2012· article· en· W1970145122 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Patricia Giraldo, Marta Rodríguez‐Quijano, José Fernando Vázquez-Armijo, J. M. Carrillo, Elena Benavente

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicChromosomal and Genetic Variations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrachypodium distachyonBrachypodiumBiologyPloidyMicrosatelliteBotanyAlleleGeneticsGenomeGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Brachypodium distachyon (L.) P. Beauv. (2n = 2x = 10) is a small annual grass species where the existence of three different cytotypes (10, 20, and 30 chromosomes) has long been regarded as a case of autopolyploid series with x = 5. However, it has been demonstrated that the cytotypes assumed to be polyploids represent two separate Brachypodium species recently named as Brachypodium stacei (2n = 2x = 20) and Brachypodium hybridum (2n = 4x = 30). The aim of this study was to find a PCR-based alternative approach that could replace standard cytotyping methods (i.e., chromosome counting and flow cytometry) to characterize each of the three Brachypodium species. We have analyzed with four microsatellite (SSR) markers 83 B. distachyon-type lines from varied locations in Spain, including the Balearic and Canary Islands. Within this set of lines, 64, 4, and 15 had 10, 20, and 30 chromosomes, respectively. The surveyed markers produced cytotype-specific SSR profiles. So, a single amplification product was generated in the diploid samples, with nonoverlapping allelic ranges between the 2n = 10 and 2n = 20 cytotypes, whereas two bands, one in the size range of each of the diploid cytotypes, were amplified in the 2n = 30 lines. Furthermore, the remarkable size difference obtained with the SSR ALB165 allowed the identification of the Brachypodium species by simple agarose gel electrophoresis.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations27
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicChromosomal and Genetic VariationsFrench-language works237,207