Standardized mapping of nodulation patterns in legume roots
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Optimizing nodulation in legumes is a target for crop improvement, and the spatial control of nodulation is just beginning to be unravelled. However, there is currently no method for standard phenotyping of nodulation patterns. Here we present a method and software for the quantitative analysis of nodulation phenotypes. Roots of nodulated peas (Pisum sativum), wild-type and two mutants, were photographed. Data from the photographs were extracted using custom image and data analysis software. The software makes it possible to extract each nodule's position along primary and lateral roots, and to represent the nodulated root system in a standardized way independent of the way roots are arranged in the soil. A wide variety of nodulation and root variables are calculated, and average spatial nodulation patterns can be computed from multiple samples. Standardized spatial analysis of nodulation patterns opens the way for comparative analyses among genotypes of a single legume species, as here in pea. This approach could also be used to compare nodulation patterns among crops, among plants grown under different environmental conditions, or among plants exposed to different pharmacological treatments. The proposed method should therefore prove useful for studies on nodule organogenesis and nodule physiology and for optimizing nodulation in crops.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".