Mapping the Genetic Basis of Symbiotic Variation in Legume-Rhizobium Interactions in<i>Medicago truncatula</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mutualisms are known to be genetically variable, where the genotypes differ in the fitness benefits they gain from the interaction. To date, little is known about the loci that underlie such genetic variation in fitness or whether the loci influencing fitness are partner specific, and depend on the genotype of the interaction partner. In the legume-rhizobium mutualism, one set of potential candidate genes that may influence the fitness benefits of the symbiosis are the plant genes involved in the initiation of the signaling pathway between the two partners. Here we performed quantitative trait loci (QTL) mapping in Medicago truncatula in two different rhizobium strain treatments to locate regions of the genome influencing plant traits, assess whether such regions are dependent on the genotype of the rhizobial mutualist (QTL × rhizobium strain), and evaluate the contribution of sequence variation at known symbiosis signaling genes. Two of the symbiotic signaling genes, NFP and DMI3, colocalized with two QTL affecting average fruit weight and leaf number, suggesting that natural variation in nodulation genes may potentially influence plant fitness. In both rhizobium strain treatments, there were QTL that influenced multiple traits, indicative of either tight linkage between loci or pleiotropy, including one QTL with opposing effects on growth and reproduction. There was no evidence for QTL × rhizobium strain or genotype × genotype interactions, suggesting either that such interactions are due to small-effect loci or that more genotype-genotype combinations need to be tested in future mapping studies.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".