Rapid isolation and cross‐amplification of microsatellite markers in <i>Plectritis congesta</i> (Valerianaceae) with 454 sequencing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PREMISE OF THE STUDY: Microsatellite markers were isolated and characterized in Plectritis congesta for studying the evolution of this highly variable species. METHODS AND RESULTS: We used 454 sequencing of DNA enriched for microsatellite repeats to develop microsatellite markers. This produced 262079 reads with an average length of 324 bp, representing approximately 800 microsatellite regions from which 48 primers were tested. Eleven markers reliably amplified without optimization. These primer pairs showed a high degree of heterozygosity and allelic diversity. Unexpectedly, half of the markers contained multiple peaks, with up to four alleles per individual, which suggests that either polyploidy or isolated gene duplication has occurred within this clade. These primers successfully cross-amplified in P. macrocera, indicating the utility of these markers for the genus. CONCLUSIONS: With variation in mating system and habitat, a mix of duplicated and nonduplicated markers, and high genetic variance, Plectritis is an ideal candidate model genus for studying the ecological and evolutionary consequences of gene duplication.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".