Genetic relationship among cultivated and wild grapevine accessions from Tunisia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have used nuclear and chloroplast molecular markers to genotype cultivated and wild accessions of Vitis vinifera L. from Tunisia and assess their genetic relationships. Fifty-five distinct genotypes were identified among 80 cultivated accessions, including 18 genotypic groups containing between 2 and 5 accessions per group. They could represent a total of 60 distinct cultivars owing to berry colour variation found within identical genotype groups. Most of the 55 genotypes represent unique table grape genotypes except for one of them that was found identical to the genotype of table grape cultivar Rosseti. Hybridization among cultivars as well as self pollinations seems to have played an important role in their origin since several groups of closely related cultivars were observed. Furthermore, a parentage analysis showed a high probability for a parent hybrid relationship within two groups of three cultivars. No strong genetic similarities were found between cultivated and wild samples indicating that the cultivated accessions do not derive from local Vitis vinifera L. populations but could have been introduced from other regions in historic times.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".