MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060998680 · doi:10.4141/p02-077

Inheritance of maintenance and restoration of the <i>Diplotaxis muralis</i> (<i>mur</i>) cytoplasmic male sterility system in summer rape

2003· article· en· W2060998680 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
T. C. Riungu, P. B. E. McVetty

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPhotosynthetic Processes and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSterilityCytoplasmic male sterilityBiologySoftware maintainerBrassicaCultivarHybrid seedCanolaAlleleBotanyGeneHorticultureAgronomyGeneticsHybrid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The inheritance of Diplotaxis muralis (L) DC. mur cytoplasmic male sterile (CMS) system maintenance and restoration in summer rape (Brassica napus L.) was studied by crossing eight summer rape cultivars of diverse origin to a winter habit mur CMS A-line. The F1 progenies from all eight crosses were male fertile and were selfed to produce the F2 generation. The F2 generation was grown in the field and data on segregation for male fertility and sterility were recorded and analyzed. The F2 segregation data showed that mur CMS restoration in summer rape is controlled by dominant alleles at one to three restorer genes. The number of genes for the restoration of male fertility in mur CMS varied both among and, occasionally, within cultivars. Maintainer lines for mur CMS must carry recessive alleles in homozygous condition at all three restorer genes. The ready availability of summer rape restorers suggests that the mur CMS system has good potential for hybrid cultivar development and hybrid seed production in summer rape; however, maintainers in summer rape must first be discovered or developed. Key words: Cytoplasmic male sterility, canola, Brassica napus, male sterility

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant ScienceSame topicPhotosynthetic Processes and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207