Phylogenetic analysis of C, M, N, and U genomes and their relationships with <i>Triticum</i> and other related genomes as revealed by LMW-GS genes at <i>Glu-3</i> loci
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phylogenetic relationships between the C, U, N, and M genomes of Aegilops species and the genomes of common wheat and other related species were investigated by using three types of low-molecular-weight glutenin subunit (LMW-GS) genes at Glu-3 loci. A total of 20 LMW-GS genes from Aegilops and Triticum species were isolated, including 11 LMW-m type and 9 LMW-i type genes. Particularly, four LMW-m type and three LMW-i type subunits encoded by the genes on the C, N, and U genomes possessed an extra cysteine residue at conserved positions, which could provide useful information for understanding phylogenetic relationships among Aegilops and Triticum genomes. Phylogenetic trees constructed by using either LMW-i or the combination of LMW-m and LMW-s, as well as analysis of all the three types of LMW-GS genes together, demonstrated that the C and U genomes were closely related to the A genome, whereas the N and M genomes were closely related to the D genome. Our results support previous findings that the A genome was derived from Triticum uratu, the B genome was from Aegilops speltoides, and the D genome was from Aegilops tauschii. In addition, phylogenetic relationships among different genomes analysed in this study support the concept that Aegilops is not monophyletic.
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".