Marker‐Based Selection of QTL Affecting Grain and Malt Quality in Two‐Row Barley
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Malt quality traits of barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.) may be suitable candidates for marker‐assisted selection, as their evaluation involves laborious and costly procedures. Four regions of the genome were previously reported to affect several grain and malt quality traits in the two‐row barley cross ‘Harrington’/‘TR306’. This study used an independent set of lines derived from the same cross to verify the existence of quantitative trait loci (QTL) in these regions. Molecular marker genotypes were used to select 47 lines from among 410 Harrington/TR306 lines that had not been used in the original mapping experiment. Four groups of lines were selected on the basis of their genotype at marker loci in two regions on chromosome 7 (5H) with QTL affecting kernel weight and plumpness, grain protein, extract β‐glucan content, the difference between fine‐grind and coarse‐grind extract, soluble protein, diastatic power, α‐amylase activity and fine‐grind extract, and in regions on chromosomes 3 (3H) and 6 (6H) with QTL affecting extract β‐glucan content and fine‐coarse difference. Grain and malt quality traits of these lines were determined from grain grown in five field environments in western Canada. The results confirmed the presence of QTL on chromosome 7 affecting all traits previously reported. Marker‐based selection for two regions on chromosome 7 was effective in identifying phenotypically superior lines, and the magnitudes of the combined effects for these regions were close to the estimates calculated in the mapping experiment. The presence of QTL on chromosomes 3 and 6 could not be confirmed as categorically, but combined selection for extract β‐glucan content and fine‐coarse difference at all four QTL regions was more effective than selection for only the two regions on chromosome 7.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".