MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118079005 · doi:10.1139/g99-079

Use of microsatellite DNA markers to investigate the level of genetic diversity and population genetic structure of coconut (<i>Cocos nucifera</i> L.)

2000· article· en· W2118079005 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
L. Perera, Joanne Russell, Jim Provan, W. Powell

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicCoconut Research and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCommonwealth Scholarship Commission
KeywordsBiologyCocos nuciferaMicrosatelliteGenetic diversityEcotypeAlleleLocus (genetics)GeneticsPopulationGenetic distanceGenetic variationBotanyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have used eight pairs of simple sequence repeat (SSR) primers to analyse the genetic diversity in 130 individuals of coconut (Cocos nucifera L.) comprising 75 tall individuals and 55 dwarf individuals, representing 94 different coconut ecotypes throughout the world. A total of 51 alleles were detected, with an average of 6.4 alleles per locus. Fifty alleles were detected in tall coconuts (talls; mean alleles/locus 6.3) compared with only 26 (mean/locus 3.3) in dwarfs, and the average diversity value in talls (0.589) was also significantly higher than that in dwarfs (0.348). Using the eight SSRs we were able to uniquely discriminate 116 of the 130 individuals. A phenetic tree based on DAD (absolute distance) values clustered individuals into five groups, each mainly composed of either talls or dwarfs. These results provide evidence in support of previous hypotheses concerning the dissemination of coconut, as well as important new information for conservation and breeding 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 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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations118
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicCoconut Research and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207