Genome-wide association mapping of frost tolerance in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Frost tolerance is a key trait with economic and agronomic importance in barley because it is a major component of winter hardiness, and therefore limits the geographical distribution of the crop and the effective transfer of quality traits between spring and winter crop types. Three main frost tolerance QTL (Fr-H1, Fr-H2 and Fr-H3) have been identified from bi-parental genetic mapping but it can be argued that those mapping populations only capture a portion of the genetic diversity of the species. A genetically broad dataset consisting of 184 genotypes, representative of the barley gene pool cultivated in the Mediterranean basin over an extended time period, was genotyped with 1536 SNP markers. Frost tolerance phenotype scores were collected from two trial sites, Foradada (Spain) and Fiorenzuola (Italy) and combined with the genotypic data in genome wide association analyses (GWAS) using Eigenstrat and kinship approaches to account for population structure. RESULTS: GWAS analyses identified twelve and seven positive SNP associations at Foradada and Fiorenzuola, respectively, using Eigenstrat and six and four, respectively, using kinship. Linkage disequilibrium analyses of the significant SNP associations showed they are genetically independent. In the kinship analysis, two of the significant SNP associations were tightly linked to the Fr-H2 and HvBmy loci on chromosomes 5H and 4HL, respectively. The other significant kinship associations were located in genomic regions that have not previously been associated with cold stress. CONCLUSIONS: Haplotype analysis revealed that most of the significant SNP loci are fixed in the winter or facultative types, while they are freely segregating within the un-adapted spring barley genepool. Although there is a major interest in detecting new variation to improve frost tolerance of available winter and facultative types, from a GWAS perspective, working within the un-adapted spring germplasm pool is an attractive alternative strategy which would minimize statistical issues, simplify the interpretation of the data and identify phenology independent genetic determinants of frost tolerance.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".