MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1971588864 · doi:10.1139/x02-022

Monitoring male reproductive success in a Japanese black pine clonal seed orchard with RAPD markers

2002· article· en· W1971588864 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Susumu Goto, Fumihiko Miyahara, Y. Ide

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeed orchardBiologyRAPDOrchardPopulationOpen pollinationBotanyHorticultureSelfingReproductive successPollinationPollenGenetic diversity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Overall male reproductive success was investigated in a Japanese black pine (Pinus thunbergii Parl.) clonal seed orchard consisting of 16 nematode-resistant clones, using random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) markers. We genotyped all 16 of the orchard clones at selected RAPD loci by analyzing diploid needles and 10 haploid megagametophytes from each of them. In addition, the male parent of open-pollinated seedlings was identified by comparing their phenotypes with the genotypes of the orchard clones. In this way the male parents of 559 seedlings of 648 seedlings of progenies from 14 parental (orchard) clones were determined. The level of external pollen contamination in the seed orchard was estimated to be 2.2% for the total population. The effective mean selfing rate observed was 1.5%. Male reproductive success among clones varied widely, from 0.8 to 24.4%, for the total population. Our data suggest that the significant deviation in male reproductive success of individual clones from panmictic ratios may be a problem for the genetic quality in seed orchard crops. To improve the parental balance of seed orchard crops, the use of artificial management techniques such as gibberellin A4/7 treatment, supplemental mass pollination, and rearrangement of clonal ramets is recommended in seed orchards.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.171 · 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

Citations18
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest Research→Same topicPlant and animal studies→French-language works237,207→