MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996398827 · doi:10.1139/g10-003

A new source of cytoplasmic male sterility found in wild beet and its relationship to other CMS types

2010· article· en· W1996398827 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yuki Kawanishi, Hiroshi Shinada, Muneyuki Matsunaga, Yusuke Masaki, Tetsuo Mikami, Tomohiko Kubo

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Reproductive Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of Science
KeywordsBiologyCytoplasmic male sterilitySterilityGeneticsCytoplasmBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We found a number of male-sterile plants in a wild beet (Beta vulgaris L. subsp. maritima) accession line, FR4-31. The inheritance study of the male sterility indicated the trait to be of the cytoplasmic type. The mitochondrial genome of FR4-31 proved to lack the male-sterility-associated genes preSatp6 and orf129, which are characteristic of the Owen CMS and I-12CMS(3) cytoplasms of beets, respectively. Instead, the truncated cox2 gene involved in G CMS originating from wild beets was present in the FR4-31 mitochondrial genome. In Southern hybridization using four mitochondrial gene probes, the FR4-31 cytoplasm showed patterns similar to those typical of the G cytoplasm. It is thus likely that the FR4-31 cytoplasm has a different CMS mechanism from both Owen CMS and I-12CMS(3), and that the FR4-31 and G cytoplasms resemble each other closely. A restriction map of the FR4-31 mitochondrial DNA was generated and aligned with those published for the Owen and normal fertile cytoplasms. The FR4-31 mitochondrial genome was revealed to differ extensively in arrangement from the Owen and normal genomes, and the male-sterile Owen and FR4-31 genomes seem to be derived independently from an ancestral genome.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.875
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations9
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicPlant Reproductive BiologyFrench-language works237,207