RAPD Analysis of 54 North American Flax Cultivars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Broadening the genetic base of linseed flax ( Linum usitatissimum L.) cultivars to sustain improvement requires assessment of genetic diversity available in flax germplasm. The objective of this study was to analyze the genetic variation, genetic erosion, and genetic relationship of 54 North American flax cultivars by means of random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) markers. The variations observed at the 84 polymorphic RAPD loci were relatively moderate with respect to primer, polymorphism, and cultivar. The proportions of fixed recessive RAPD loci for all the cultivars ranged from 36.9 to 59.2%, with an average of 45.3%. Genetic erosion in the century‐long breeding programs was not statistically significant as revealed by the proportion of fixed recessive RAPD loci, but the trend appeared to be that 2.5% of variable RAPD loci were fixed over 100 yr. While some variable RAPD loci were fixed over different breeding periods, the genetic relatedness of the cultivars was reduced in the Canadian programs, but not in the U.S. programs. The genetic relationships of the cultivars inferred via RAPD similarity were largely consistent with known, but incomplete, pedigrees. Both Canadian and U.S. cultivars were intermixed in various groups without distinct separation and several genetically distinct cultivars (i.e., NDR 52, Vimy, Rocket, Norland, Dakota, and Marine) were identified.
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 | 0.001 | 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 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".