Sexual hybridization between <i>Capsella bursa‐pastoris</i> (L.) Medik (♀) and <i>Camelina sativa</i> (L.) Crantz (♂) (Brassicaceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The development of transgenic oilseed Camelina sativa (2n = 40) and the potential for hybridization with its weedy relative Capsella bursa‐pastoris (2n = 36) necessitates a careful evaluation of the reproductive compatibility between the species. Here, we conducted over 1800 crosses (emasculation and manual pollination) to examine the ability of 10 Canadian C. bursa‐pastoris (♀) accessions to hybridize with five accessions of C. sativa (♂). Seven hybrids were confirmed among 586 putative hybrids screened with species‐specific markers, indicating a hybridization rate of 1.5 hybrids per 10 000 ovules pollinated. All seven hybrids had intermediate DNA content compared to their parents, were morphologically distinct, had low (1.9%) pollen fertility and failed to produce selfed or backcrossed seed. Given the abundance of C. bursa‐pastoris along field margins, hybrids will likely be generated in the wild, but they will be unable to establish lineages unless fertility is restored. The large number of crosses and the diversity captured by the use of multiple accessions resulted in strong statistical power and a high degree of confidence in the estimated hybridization rate.
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 | 0.001 | 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".