MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011664975 · doi:10.1093/pcp/pcr004

TOMATOMA: A Novel Tomato Mutant Database Distributing Micro-Tom Mutant Collections

2011· article· en· W2011664975 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Takeshi Saito, Tohru Ariizumi, Yoshihiro Okabe, Erika Asamizu, Kyoko Hiwasa-Tanase, Naoya Fukuda, Tsuyoshi Mizoguchi, Yukiko Yamazaki, Koh Aoki, Hiroshi Ezura

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant and Cell Physiology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Genetic and Mutation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of GeneticsMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology
KeywordsMutantGeneticsEthyl methanesulfonateBiologyMutagenesisPhenotypeAlleleDatabasePopulationWild typeGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The tomato is an excellent model for studies of plants bearing berry-type fruits and for experimental studies of the Solanaceae family of plants due to its conserved genetic organization. In this study, a comprehensive mutant tomato population was generated in the background of Micro-Tom, a dwarf, rapid-growth variety. In this and previous studies, a family including 8,598 and 6,422 M(2) mutagenized lines was produced by ethylmethane sulfonate (EMS) mutagenesis and γ-ray irradiation, and this study developed and investigated these M(2) plants for alteration of visible phenotypes. A total of 9,183 independent M(2) families comprising 91,830 M(2) plants were inspected for phenotypic alteration, and 1,048 individual mutants were isolated. Subsequently, the observed mutant phenotypes were classified into 15 major categories and 48 subcategories. Overall, 1,819 phenotypic categories were found in 1,048 mutants. Of these mutants, 549 were pleiotropic, whereas 499 were non-pleiotropic. Multiple different mutant alleles per locus were found in the mutant libraries, suggesting that the mutagenized populations were nearly saturated. Additionally, genetic analysis of backcrosses indicated the successful inheritance of the mutations in BC(1)F(2) populations, confirming the reproducibility in the morphological phenotyping of the M(2) plants. To integrate and manage the visible phenotypes of mutants and other associated data, we developed the in silico database TOMATOMA, a relational system interfacing modules between mutant line names and phenotypic categories. TOMATOMA is a freely accessible database, and these mutant recourses are available through the TOMATOMA (http://tomatoma.nbrp.jp/index.jsp).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.009

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.168 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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

Citations249
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant and Cell PhysiologySame topicPlant Genetic and Mutation StudiesFrench-language works237,207