Construction of a Genetic Linkage Map for the Olive Based on AFLP and SSR Markers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genetic mapping is essential for quantitative trait locus (QTL) identification related to interesting traits. However, only two genetic maps on olive have yet been published, with very few transferable markers. We have constructed a linkage map of the olive according to a “two‐way pseudo‐testcross” mapping strategy and based on the progeny generated from a cross between ‘Picholine marocaine’ (female parent) × ‘Picholine du Languedoc’ (male parent) cultivars. A total of 592 markers (47 simple sequence repeat [SSR], 509 amplified fragment length polymorphism [AFLP], 27 inter‐simple sequence repeat [ISSR], eight random amplified polymorphic DNA [RAPD], and one sequence characterized amplified region [SCAR] marker) were scored in 140 F 1 progeny. Linkage groups were defined at a likelihood odds ratio score of 6.00 and a recombination fraction of 0.40. The maternal map consisted of 175 markers clustered into 40 linkage groups and spanning 1547.40 cM, while the paternal map was based on 170 markers clustered into 38 linkage groups and covering 1428.00 cM. For the consensus map, 345 markers were used covering 2366.4 cM and clustered into 49 linkage groups with a mean distance between two adjacent loci of 8.06 cM and the estimated map coverage of 72.6%. This integrated map provides a useful tool for the detection of QTLs controlling economically important traits.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".