Genetic relationships within the Cucurbitaceae as assessed by consensus chloroplast simple sequence repeats (ccSSR) marker and sequence analyses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To investigate genetic relationships in Benincaseae (19 accessions), Cucurbiteae (1), Joliffieae (2), Melothrieae (2), and Sicyeae (3) tribes of the family Cucurbitaceae, consensus chloroplast simple sequence repeats (ccSSR) primer pairs obtained from tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) chloroplast DNA were used. Variation in the length and putative sequence substitution events of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) products were analyzed. Sequencing of four fragments (ccSSR-1, -7, -8, and -19) revealed that convergence in fragment length occurs in more distant species comparisons. In ccSSR-1 and -8, the same fragment lengths occurred as the result of different insertion and deletion events. Nevertheless, the examination of a large number of ccSSR fragments suggested that this apparent homoplasy could be overshadowed by evolutionary relationships among taxa. This hypothesis is supported by the relative degree of positive congruence of taxon groupings after cluster and principal components analyses performed on both base pair length and sequence substitution data. Moreover, these analyses support previous biochemical and morphological data indicating that distinct lineages exist within the Benincaseae. Likewise, data support the hypotheses that the genus Benincasa is descended from an ancient African ancestor and that the progenitor of the New World Sicyeae tribe shares a common ancestor with the genus Luffa of the Old World Benincaseae.Key words: Benincaseae, chloroplast, consensus, homoplasy, microsatellite, simple sequence repeats.
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 | 0.002 | 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".