Early-generation germplasm introgression from <i>Sorghum macrospermum</i> into sorghum (<i>S. bicolor</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sorghum has been improved by public and private breeding programs utilizing germplasm mostly from within the species Sorghum bicolor. Recently, hybridization with an Australian species, S. macrospermum (AAB1B1YYZZ), has been demonstrated and the genomic relationship to S. bicolor (AAB1B1) shown to be partially compatible. For this species to be potentially useful to sorghum improvement programs, there must be documented introgression into an S. bicolor background. Fifteen BC1F1 progeny were recovered using the interspecific hybrid as a female and embryo rescue. In these progeny, chromosome numbers ranged from 35 to 70 and all were essentially male-sterile. Repeated backcrossing with S. bicolor pollen produced BC2F1 seed on 3 of the 15 BC1F1 plants. BC2F1 progeny had varying levels of male fertility; selfed seed set ranged from 0% to 95%, with only 2 individuals being completely male-sterile. Using AFLP and SSR markers, genomic introgression of S. macrospermum ranged from 0% to 18.6%. Cytogenetic analysis of 19 individuals revealed that chromosome numbers were 20, except for a single backcross that had 21 chromosomes. Molecular cytogenetic analysis confirmed the presence of recombinant introgression chromosomes as well as alien addition and alien substitution chromosomes within the BC2F1s.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".