Detecting Genetic Changes over Two Generations of Seed Increase in an Awned Slender Wheatgrass Population Using AFLP Markers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".