Outlier Loci and Selection Signatures of Simple Sequence Repeats (SSRs) in Flax (Linum usitatissimum L.)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genomic microsatellites (gSSRs) and expressed sequence tag-derived SSRs (EST-SSRs) have gained wide application for elucidating genetic diversity and population structure in plants. Both marker systems are assumed to be selectively neutral when making demographic inferences, but this assumption is rarely tested. In this study, three neutrality tests were assessed for identifying outlier loci among 150 SSRs (85 gSSRs and 65 EST-SSRs) that likely influence estimates of population structure in three differentiated flax sub-populations (F ST = 0.19). Moreover, the utility of gSSRs, EST-SSRs, and the combined sets of SSRs was also evaluated in assessing genetic diversity and population structure in flax. Six outlier loci were identified by at least two neutrality tests showing footprints of balancing selection. After removing the outlier loci, the STRUCTURE analysis and the dendrogram topology of EST-SSRs improved. Conversely, gSSRs and combined SSRs results did not change significantly, possibly as a consequence of the higher number of neutral loci assessed. Taken together, the genetic structure analyses established the superiority of gSSRs to determine the genetic relationships among flax accessions, although the combined SSRs produced the best results. Genetic diversity parameters did not differ statistically (P > 0.05) between gSSRs and EST-SSRs, an observation partially explained by the similar number of repeat motifs. Our study provides new insights into the ability of gSSRs and EST-SSRs to measure genetic diversity and structure in flax and confirms the importance of testing for the occurrence of outlier loci to properly assess natural and breeding populations, particularly in studies considering only few loci.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 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".