MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Molecular physiology and breeding at the crossroads of cold hardiness improvement

2012· review· en· W2147009151 on OpenAlexaff
Yves Castonguay, Marie‐Pierre Dubé, Jean Cloutier, Annick Bertrand, R. Michaud, Serge Laberge

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiologia Plantarum · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoybean genetics and cultivation
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersInstitut National de la Recherche Agronomique
KeywordsHardiness (plants)BiologyGermplasmSelection (genetic algorithm)BiotechnologyMolecular breedingMarker-assisted selectionFreezing toleranceForageGeneticsQuantitative trait locusGeneAgronomyCultivar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) is a major forage legume grown extensively worldwide with important agronomic and environmental attributes. Insufficient cold hardiness is a major impediment to its reliable production in northern climates. Improvement of freezing tolerance using conventional breeding approaches is slowed by the quantitative nature of inheritance and strong interactions with the environment. The development of gene-based markers would facilitate the identification of genotypes with superior stress tolerance. Successive cycles of recurrent selection were applied using an indoor screening method to develop populations with significantly higher tolerance to freezing (TF). Bulk segregant analysis of heterogeneous TF populations identified DNA variations that are progressively enriched in frequency in response to selection. Polymorphisms resulting from intragenic variations within a dehydrin gene were identified and could potentially lead to the development of robust selection tools. Our results illustrate the benefits of feedback interactions between germplasm development programs and molecular physiology for a deeper understanding of the molecular and genetic bases of cold hardiness.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.342

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations33
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiologia PlantarumSame topicSoybean genetics and cultivationFrench-language works237,207