MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090624969 · doi:10.2135/cropsci2003.1852

RAPD Variations in Selected and Unselected Blue Grama Populations

2003· article· en· W2090624969 on OpenAlexaffabout
Anh T. Phan, Yong‐Bi Fu, S. Ray Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueCrop Science · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicTurfgrass Adaptation and Management
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaDucks Unlimited Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRAPDBiologyPopulationGenetic diversityGenetic variationGenetic variabilityBotanyVeterinary medicineGeneticsGenotypeGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis H.B.K. Lag. ex Steud.) is one of the most widespread native grasses in western North America. Little is known about the genetic diversity of this species and the genetic shift in selected populations. Random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) markers were used to assess the genetic variations of blue grama plants in 11 natural source populations (SPs) in southern Manitoba and two selected populations. Population ‘BMSC’ was a balanced multisite composite of 99 clones selected for higher seed yield from the 11 SPs. Population ‘MSC’ was a mass‐selected composite of 25 clones with higher seed yield from eight SPs. Twelve RAPD primers were used to assay 108 original propagules from the 11 SPs and 96 seedlings from each selected population. A total of 69 polymorphic RAPD bands were detected. No unique RAPD bands were found for any SPs and 97.8% of the total RAPD variation was detected within SPs. Variation in RAPD markers was not associated with geographical distances. Highly significant changes in RAPD band frequency from their SPs were detected in both selected populations, but only MSC displayed the fixation of polymorphic bands. The estimated genetic shifts were small, 0.6% for BMSC and 1.9% for MSC.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 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

Citations16
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCrop ScienceSame topicTurfgrass Adaptation and ManagementFrench-language works237,207