MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980899401 · doi:10.2135/cropsci2004.0332

Detecting Genetic Changes over Two Generations of Seed Increase in an Awned Slender Wheatgrass Population Using AFLP Markers

2005· article· en· W1980899401 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCrop Science · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicTurfgrass Adaptation and Management
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmplified fragment length polymorphismBiologyPopulationGenetic variationGenetic diversityBotanyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diverse native grass populations are being developed for revegetation and land reclamation purposes, but little is known about the maintenance of the genetic diversity of these developed populations during the process of seed increase. The objectives of this study were to assess the genetic shift over two generations of seed increase in a multisite composite population (AC Pintail) of the self‐pollinating awned slender wheatgrass [ Elymus trachycaulus subsp. subsecundus (Link) Gould] and to compare its genetic variation with the released cultivar AEC Hillcrest. AC Pintail was formed by bulking seed of 200 plants collected from 60 sites across the prairie of western Canada. The amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) technique was applied to assay 50 plants from each of four populations (AC Pintail G0, G1, and G2 and AEC Hillcrest breeder seed). For each sample, seven AFLP primer pairs were applied and 194 polymorphic bands were scored. AC Pintail revealed more polymorphic bands (74%) than AEC Hillcrest (47%), and most of the scored bands for AEC Hillcrest had occurrence frequencies approaching 1 or 0. The largest within‐population AFLP variation observed resided within AC Pintail G0 (30.3), followed by G1 (29.7), G2 (27.9), and AEC Hillcrest (10.4). Significant differences were found among these seed sources and >95% of the total AFLP variation resided within the three AC Pintail populations. Fifty‐three bands displayed significant changes from G0 to G1 and 76 from G0 to G2 of AC Pintail. These results indicate that AC Pintail harbored more genetic variation than AEC Hillcrest but could lose up to 8% of the original diversity in the first two generations of seed increase.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.463
Threshold uncertainty score0.654

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.269 · 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