MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061337075 · doi:10.1139/g03-013

Cross-species amplification from crop soybean<i>Glycine max</i>provides informative microsatellite markers for the study of inbreeding wild relatives

2003· article· en· W2061337075 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
K. Hempel, Rod Peakall

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoybean genetics and cultivation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyMicrosatelliteGeneticsLocus (genetics)SelfingAlleleInbreedingPopulationEvolutionary biologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of microsatellite markers through transfer of primers from related species (cross-species amplification) remains a little-explored alternative to the de novo method in plants. In this study of 100 microsatellite loci from Glycine max, we examined two aspects of primer transfer. First, we tested if source locus properties can predict primer transfer and polymorphism in Glycine cyrtoloba and Glycine clandestina. We transferred 23 primers to G. cyrtoloba and 42 to G. clandestina, with 19 loci polymorphic within G. clandestina. However, we could not predict transfer or polymorphism from the source locus properties. Second, we evaluated the subset of 11 polymorphic loci for study in G. clandestina populations representing two local morphotypes. All loci were informative within populations (population mean He +/- SE = 0.58 +/- 0.04). We directly sequenced 28 alleles at 4 representative loci. The allelic patterns and sequencing results established that 8 of 11 loci were typical microsatellites, confirming the utility of primer transfer as an alternative to de novo development. Additionally, we found that morphotypic differentiation between populations was paralleled by changes in polymorphism level at six loci and size homoplasy at one locus. We interpret these patterns as being a product of selfing in G. clandestina. Our results demonstrate the value of allele sequence knowledge for the most effective use of microsatellites.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score0.280

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations17
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicSoybean genetics and cultivationFrench-language works237,207