Wheat Polyphenol Oxidase
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The enzyme polyphenol oxidase (PPO) has been implicated in discoloration of Asian noodles. The recombinant inbred line (RIL) populations, M6/‘Opata 85’, NY18/CC, and ND2603/‘Butte 86’ were used to investigate the distribution, chromosome location, and number of loci involved in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) PPO. PPO activity was measured by means of the substrates L‐DOPA (L‐3,4‐dihydroxyphenyl‐alanine) and L‐tyrosine. The M6/Opata 85 RIL population had a normal distribution, while the ND2603/Butte 86 RIL population had a bimodal distribution for PPO activity (L‐DOPA assay). Transgressive segregants were observed for all three populations. Correlations between L‐DOPA and L‐tyrosine assays for PPO activity were low to medium and could be attributed to substrate specificity and environment. For the combined analysis of M6/Opata 85 RIL populations, the QTL marker Xfba314 (located on chromosome 2D) showed significant association with PPO activity for the L‐DOPA assay. For the combined analysis of NY18/CC, three QTL markers for L‐DOPA, and two different QTL markers for L‐tyrosine, revealed an association with PPO activity at LOD scores of >2.4. The QTL markers for the NY18/CC RIL population were located on chromosomes 2A, 2B, 3D, and 6B. The ND2603/Butte 86 population had relatively few other loci for linkage analysis and only the marker Xbcd907.RV.I located on chromosome 3BS showed a weak association with PPO activity on the basis of the L‐DOPA assay. The identified QTL markers will be useful for marker‐assisted selection as they build upon the evolving maps for these populations, and for resolving in greater detail the genetic basis of PPO activity in wheat.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".