MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099964843 · doi:10.3852/10-184

Genetic diversity and population structure in French populations of<i>Mycosphaerella graminicola</i>

2011· article· en· W2099964843 on OpenAlexaff
Léa El Chartouni, Benoît Tisserant, Ali Siah, Florent Duyme, Jean‐Baptiste Leducq, Caroline Deweer, Céline Fichter-Roisin, Jean Sanssené, Roger Durand, Patrice Halama, Philippe Reignault

Bibliographic record

VenueMycologia · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Pathogens and Fungal Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMycosphaerella graminicolaBiologyGraminicolaMycosphaerellaGenetic diversityGenetic structurePopulationGene flowMicrosatelliteGenetic variationGenotypeGeneticsGenetic markerGenetic variabilityBotanyGeneAlleleDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mycosphaerella graminicola populations were examined in France with microsatellite markers and PCR-SSCP analysis of partial actin and β-tubulin encoding sequences. A total of 363 isolates was sampled in 2005 from 17 provinces, and genotypes from corresponding strains were characterized. Unique haplotypes comprised 84% of the population, and gene diversity was high nationwide (0.70) and locally. A moderate genetic differentiation (G(ST) = 0.18) was found and indicated that in France the M. graminicola population was more structured than in other previously studied European countries. Bayesian structure analysis identified three genetic clusters distributed among the 17 provinces. Our results highlighted the potential for the adaptation of the fungus to local conditions, leading to genetic clusters among the French population of the fungus as well as genotype flow between regional clusters.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.174

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations28
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMycologiaSame topicPlant Pathogens and Fungal DiseasesFrench-language works237,207