MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

FREQUENCY OF INDUCED CHLOROPHYLL MUTATIONS IN DIPLOID AND TETRAPLOID BARLEY

2010· article· en· W2143425658 on OpenAlexaff
ARNE MÜNTZING

Bibliographic record

VenueHereditas · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBotanical Research and Chemistry
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Genetics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPloidyBiologyCitationGeneticsLibrary scienceComputer scienceGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

EEDS of a variety of barley (Opal B) and of the corresponding S autotetraploid strain were irradiated in 1940.The immediate effects of this treatment have already been described (MUNTZING, 1941).In the tetraploid material the germination of the seeds and the vigour of the resulting plants were on an average much less decreased than in the corresponding diploids.Also as regards fertility the average decrease was less pronounced in the tetraploids than in the diploids.This differential behaviour was ascribed to the fact that in the autotetraploid line there are four quite homologous genomes instead of only two as in the diploid.Thanks to this gene and chromosome duplication deleterious changes occurring at a certain locus in one chromosome will in most cases be counterbalanced by a normal condition in the other homologous chromosomes.This view was further supported by observations of the X,generatioh, grown in 1941.In the first place the production of chlorophyll mutations is of interest.When observing the seedlings in the field a distinct difference was at once evident between the diploid and tetraploid material.In the tetraploid plots not a single typical chlorophyll mutant could be detected.In the diploid plots, on the contrary, there was a rather frequent occurrence of the usual categories of chlorophyll mutations, viz.albina, xantha, alboviridis, viridis and tigrina (cf.GUSTAFSSON, 1940).The data available may be summarised in the following table (Table 1).As is evident from the table, 75 chlorophyll mutants were present in the X,-generation of the diploids among a total of 5,558 plants observed.These values were obtained by summation of the figures corresponding to 5,000, 10,000 and 15,000 r.In the tetraploids, 2,365 plants belonged to the X,-progenies corresponding to the same intensities of irradiation (5,000--15,000 r ).All these 2,365 plants were apparently normal, or, at any rate, they did not represent the clear-cut mutant categories occurring in the diploid material.Thus, the com-

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.225 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHereditasSame topicBotanical Research and ChemistryFrench-language works237,207