MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087766587 · doi:10.1139/g00-024

A search for diagnostic AFLP markers in <i>Cichorium </i>species with emphasis on endive and chicory cultivar groups

2000· article· en· W2087766587 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Annemieke M. Kiers, Ted H. M. Mes, R. van der Meijden, Konrad Bachmann

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBotany and Plant Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCichoriumBiologyCultivarAmplified fragment length polymorphismUPGMABotanyPhylogenetic treeGenetic distanceGenetic relationshipGeneticsGenetic variationGenetic diversityGenePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The genus Cichorium consists of two widely cultivated species C. intybus (chicory) and C. endivia (endive) and four wild species, C. bottae, C. spinosum, C. calvum, and C. pumilum. A multivariate and an UPGMA (unweighted pair group method average) analysis based on AFLP (amplified fragment length polymorphism) markers were used to establish the genetic relationships among the species and cultivar groups of C. intybus and C. endivia. At the species level, the results correspond with previously obtained phylogenetic relationships in that C. bottae is the most divergent species, and C. intybus and C. spinosum, as well as C. endivia, C. pumilum, and C. calvum formed clusters. Based on the congruence between phylogenetic and genetic analyses, unique markers were expected for all species, however, hardly any specific marker was found except for C. bottae. The analysis of cultivar groups of C. intybus resembled the species analysis in two respects: (i) grouping of cultivars according to cultivar groups, and (ii) lack of markers unique to cultivar groups. In contrast to C. intybus, the cultivar series of C. endivia do not form distinct groups, which would reflect that crosses have been made among the various cultivar groups. The relationships among Cichorium species and cultivars will be useful for setting up a core collection of Cichorium, and stress the importance of inclusion of the wild species in the collection.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations47
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicBotany and Plant Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207