MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043054945 · doi:10.1111/pbr.12118

Comparative assessment of genetic diversity between wild and cultivated barley using g<scp>SSR</scp> and <scp>EST</scp>‐<scp>SSR</scp> markers

2013· article· en· W2043054945 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Breeding · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWheat and Barley Genetics and Pathology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyGermplasmGenetic diversityMicrosatelliteIntrogressionAlleleGenotypeGenetic variationCropHordeum vulgareGenetic markerGeneticsBotanyPoaceaeAgronomyGenePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Barley is an economically important cereal crop especially for feed and malt production, but its value as food is increasing due to various health benefits. Wild barley is the progenitor of modern day barley cultivars possessing a rich source of genetic variation for various biotic and abiotic stresses. Species‐specific molecular markers have great potential for efficient introgression of these important traits from wild to cultivated barley. In the present study, 140 microsatellite markers were screened to assess the genetic variation and species‐specific markers between wild and cultivated germplasm. Of these 140, a polymorphic set of 48 genomic (g SSR ) and 16 EST ‐ SSR s amplified a total of 685 alleles. Cluster analysis discriminated all 47 accessions and classified wild and cultivated genotypes into two distinct groups, according to their geographic origin. Our analysis indicated that g SSR s were more informative than EST ‐based SSR s. Results from PC o A analysis for species‐specific alleles clearly suggest that wild barley genotypes contain a higher number of unique alleles.

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.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score0.765

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.194 · 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