Pollen‐mediated Gene Flow in <i>Camelina sativa</i> (L.) Crantz
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Camelina sativa (L.) Crantz is a biofuel crop with application on the Great Western Plains of North America that is being developed using genetic engineering. Before release of genetically engineered cultivars, the potential for pollen‐mediated gene flow (PMGF) needs to be assessed to determine if they can coexist with conventional cultivars without causing market harm. Medium‐scale field experiments (40‐m diameter) were conducted in 2011 and 2012 to quantify PMGF using a seed‐expressed florescent marker and bar gene that confers resistance to glufosinate [2‐amino‐4‐(hydroxymethylphosphinyl) butanoic acid] in Alberta, Canada. More than 17 million seeds were screened to quantify outcrossing. Pollen‐mediated gene flow best fit an exponential decay model in which the highest average PMGF (0.78%) occurred adjacent to the donor crop and rapidly declined to 0.09% by 20 m. Pollen‐mediated gene flow was leptokurtic, with a 50% reduction in gene flow 1.5 m from the pollen source. No directional trends were detected, suggesting wind dispersal was not influencing experimental results. The risk of PMGF at longer distances is minimal, but not zero, in this primarily self‐pollinating species.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".