Modes of reproduction in Australian populations of <i>Hypericum perforatum</i> L. (St. John's wort) revealed by DNA fingerprinting and cytological methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hypericum perforatum L. (St. John's wort) is widely used in homeopathic medicine, but has also become a serious weed in Australia and many other countries. Reproduction in H. perforatum was investigated using markers based on restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) and amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP). Between two Australian populations, plants displayed 14 polymorphisms from a total of 22 scorable RFLP markers when genomic DNA was probed with M13 bacteriophage, but individuals within each population exhibited identical RFLP fingerprints. Ninety-four percent of the progeny of four crosses made between the two populations exhibited identical fingerprint and ploidy level to the maternal parent, and probably originated apomictically. Seven seedlings with recombinant RFLP or AFLP fingerprints were found from a total of 121 progeny. Both molecular marker techniques detected the same recombinants from a subset of screened progeny. Cytological analysis showed that the seven recombinants comprised three tetraploids (2n = 4x = 32), three hexaploids (2n = 6x = 48), and one aneuploid (2n - 1 = 31), which suggested that the level of normal reduced embryo sacs was only 2.5%. These results are discussed in relation to the management of invasive populations, and the implications for plant breeding and production of St. John's wort for medicinal purposes.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".