Genetic Variation within and among Wildrye (<i>Elymus canadensis</i> and <i>E. virginicus</i>) Populations from the Southern Great Plains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is interest in Canada wildrye (CWR, Elymus canadensis L.) and Virginia wildrye (VWR, E. virginicus L.) for conservation and forage uses. Our objectives were to identify a set of molecular markers to assess genetic structure within and diversity among populations of CWR and VWR from the Southern Great Plains and to determine if these populations had an associated fungal endophyte. Nine CWR and five VWR populations and two barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.) cultivars were genotyped using simple sequence repeat (SSR) markers isolated from tall fescue [ Lolium arundinaceum (Schreb.) Darbysh.] expressed sequence tags (TF ESTs). Scorable fragments were produced by 31% of TF EST‐SSRs tested, thus identifying a set of SSR markers for wildrye. Populations grouped into three clusters consisting of (i) three wild populations, one plant introduction, and two commercial sources of CWR; (ii) all VWR populations and three CWR plant introductions; and (iii) barley cultivars. Clustering indicated possible gene flow between CWR and VWR. Genetic variation within populations was minimal and comparable to that of the barley cultivars. Thus, unlike many ancestral cultivars and landraces of self‐pollinated crops, CWR and VWR populations consisted of essentially pure lines and can be handled as such in a breeding program. Potentially sexual and asexual epichloë endophytes were found in several populations, indicating the need to account for endophytes in breeding and germplasm conservation efforts of wildrye.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".