MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099679128 · doi:10.1139/g02-064

A set of microsatellite markers for fingerprinting and breeding applications in <i>Pinus radiata</i>

2002· article· en· W2099679128 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
M. E. Devey, J. C. Bell, T. L. Uren, G. F. Moran

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrosatelliteBiologyAlleleGeneticsPinus radiataLocus (genetics)Null alleleGenetic markerRadiataMarker-assisted selectionBotanyVignaGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fifty microsatellite markers were developed and characterized in Pinus radiata, and from among these, a subset of 10 easily scored and highly polymorphic markers was selected for use in fingerprinting, quality control, and breeding applications. The markers were characterized based on reliable and reproducible amplification, observed and expected heterozygosities, number of alleles, a low frequency of null alleles, and a lack of close linkage with other selected markers. Allele numbers and frequencies were estimated using 24 first-generation breeding clones from Australia and New Zealand. Observed heterozygosities for the selected markers were all greater than 0.67, and there was an average of 10.5 alleles/locus. The occurrence of null alleles was checked with megagametophytes from mother trees for loci that appeared to be homozygous. The 10 markers are not closely linked (r < 0.20 and LOD > 3) to each other. The selected microsatellites fall into three discrete size classes, and with appropriate selection of fluorescent dyes for 5' end labeling, can be multiplexed with up to 6 markers/sample on an ABI PRISM 310 or similar instrument.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.239
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations37
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicForest Ecology and Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207