RAPD-based genetic linkage maps of yellow passion fruit (<i>Passiflora edulis</i>Sims. f.<i>flavicarpa</i>Deg.)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A single cross between two clones of passion fruit (Passiflora edulis Sims. f. flavicarpa Deg., 2n = 18) was selected for genetic mapping. The mapping population was composed of 90 F1 plants derived from a cross between 'IAPAR 123' (female parent) and 'IAPAR 06' (male parent). A total of 380 RAPD primers were analyzed according to two-way pseudo-testcross mapping design. The linkage analysis was performed using Mapmaker version 3.0 with LOD 4.0 and a maximum recombination fraction (theta) of 0.30. Map distances were estimated using the Kosambi mapping function. Linkage maps were constructed with 269 loci (2.38 markers/primer), of which 255 segregated 1:1, corresponding to a heterozygous state in one parent and null in the other. The linkage map for 'IAPAR123' consisted of 135 markers. A total of nine linkage groups were assembled covering 727.7 cM, with an average distance of 11.20 cM between framework loci. The sizes of the linkage groups ranged from 56 to 144.6 cM. The linkage map for 'IAPAR 06' consisted of 96 markers, covering 783.5 cM. The average distance between framework loci was 12.2 cM. The length of the nine linkage groups ranged from 20.6 to 144.2 cM. On average, both maps provided 61% genome coverage. Twenty-four loci (8.9%) remained unlinked. Among their many applications, these maps are a starting point for the identification of quantitative trait loci for resistance to the main bacterial disease affecting passion fruit orchards in Brazil, caused by Xanthomonas campestris pv. passiflorae, because parental genotypes exhibit diverse responses to bacterial inoculation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".