MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Inheritance of petal colour and its independent segregation from seed colour in <i>Brassica rapa</i>

2001· article· en· W1994653264 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mukhlesur Rahman

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Breeding · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPhotosynthetic Processes and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetalBrassica rapaBiologyBackcrossingCoatBotanyPopulationCultivarHorticultureBrassicaGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The inheritance of petal (flower) colour and seed colour in Brassica rapa was investigated using two creamy‐white flowered, yellow‐seeded yellow sarson (an ecotype from Indian subcontinent) lines, two yellow‐flowered, partially yellow‐seeded Canadian cultivars and one yellow‐flowered, brown‐seeded rapid cycling accession, and their F1, F2, F3 and backcross populations. A joint segregation of these two characters was examined in the F2 population. Petal colour was found to be under monogenic control, where the yellow petal colour gene is dominant over the creamy‐white petal colour gene. The seed colour was found to be under digenic control and the yellow seed colour (due to a transparent coat) genes of yellow sarson are recessive to the brown/partially yellow seed colour genes of the Canadian B. rapa cvs.‘Candle’ and ‘Tobin’. The genes governing the petal colour and seed colour are inherited independently. A distorted segregation for petal colour was found in the backcross populations of yellow sarson × F1 crosses, but not in the reciprocal backcrosses, i.e. F1× yellow sarson. The possible reason is discussed in the light of genetic diversity of the parental genotypes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations45
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant BreedingSame topicPhotosynthetic Processes and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207