Genetic linkage map of<i>Coffea canephora</i>: effect of segregation distortion and analysis of recombination rate in male and female meioses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two complementary segregating plant populations of Coffea canephora were produced from the same clone. One population (DH) comprised 92 doubled haploids derived from female gametes, while the other population (TC) was a test cross consisting of 44 individuals derived from male gametes. Based on the DH population, a genetic linkage map comprising 160 loci was constructed. Eleven linkage groups that putatively correspond to the 11 gametic chromosomes of C. canephora were identified. The mapped loci included more than 40 specific sequence-tagged site markers, either single-copy RFLP probes or microsatellites, that could serve as standard landmarks in coffee-genome analyses. Furthermore, comparisons for segregation distortion and recombination frequency between the two populations were performed. Although segregation distortions were observed in both populations, the frequency of loci exhibiting a very pronounced degree of distortion was especially high in the DH population. This observation is consistent with the hypothesis of strong zygotic selection among the DH population. The recombination frequencies in both populations were found to be almost indistinguishable. These results offer evidence in favour of the lack of significant sex differences in recombination in C. canephora.
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 | 0.002 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".