MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080974377 · doi:10.1139/g08-119

Genetic analysis and historical perspective of cashew (<i>Anacardium occidentale</i>L.) introduction into India

2009· article· en· W2080974377 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sunil Archak, Ambika B. Gaikwad, K. R. M. Swamy, J. L. Karihaloo

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicChromosomal and Genetic Variations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersIndian Council of Agricultural Research
KeywordsAnacardiumAmplified fragment length polymorphismBiologyGermplasmGenetic diversityGenetic variationPopulationEvolutionary biologyBotanyGeneticsDemographyHorticulture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cashew (Anacardium occidentale L.), introduced into India about 400 years ago, is distributed widely in the coastal regions as spontaneous populations as well as in cultivation. Despite the plant's commercial exploitation, little is known about its actual introduction and diversification. We attempted to construct these events by investigating the level of genetic variation and genetic structure of cashew populations collected from different geographical regions of India. A total of 91 individuals from four populations were analysed using AFLP markers and morphometric data. AFLP analysis based on 354 polymorphic loci revealed Indian cashew to have low but relatively substantial genetic diversity for an introduced species (H(E) = 0.262 and I(S) = 0.404). Twenty-seven qualitative and quantitative traits also revealed the existence of considerable morphometric variation (24% around the mean values). Bayesian cluster analysis based on AFLP data did not indicate the existence of definite population differentiation. Morphometric analysis allocated 12% variation among all four populations, whereas AFLP variation observed in cashew individuals was entirely within populations. The results, supporting the possibility of cashew having been introduced into India repeatedly over a period of time but at a single location (west coast), are discussed and their implications for germplasm management are described.

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 score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score0.230

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.199
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 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

Citations31
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicChromosomal and Genetic VariationsFrench-language works237,207