A linkage map of hexaploid oat based on grass anchor DNA clones and its relationship to other oat maps
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A cultivated oat linkage map was developed using a recombinant inbred population of 136 F6:7 lines from the cross 'Ogle' x 'TAM O-301'. A total of 441 marker loci, including 355 restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) markers, 40 amplified fragment length polymorphisms (AFLPs), 22 random amplified polymorphic DNAs (RAPDs), 7 sequence-tagged sites (STSs), 1 simple sequence repeat (SSR), 12 isozyme loci, and 4 discrete morphological traits, was mapped. Fifteen loci remained unlinked, and 426 loci produced 34 linkage groups (with 2-43 loci each) spanning 2049 cM of the oat genome (from 4.2 to 174.0 cM per group). Comparisons with other Avena maps revealed 35 genome regions syntenic between hexaploid maps and 16-34 regions conserved between diploid and hexaploid maps. Those portions of hexaploid oat maps that could be compared were completely conserved. Considerable conservation of diploid genome regions on the hexaploid map also was observed (89-95%); however, at the whole-chromosome level, colinearity was much lower. Comparisons among linkage groups, both within and among Avena mapping populations, revealed several putative homoeologous linkage group sets as well as some linkage groups composed of segments from different homoeologous groups. The relationships between many Avena linkage groups remain uncertain, however, due to incomplete coverage by comparative markers and to complications introduced by genomic duplications and rearrangements.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".