Pyrrolizidine alkaloid variation in shoots and roots of segregating hybrids between <i>Jacobaea vulgaris</i> and <i>Jacobaea aquatica</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hybridization can lead to novel qualitative or quantitative variation of secondary metabolite (SM) expression that can have ecological and evolutionary consequences. We measured pyrrolizidine alkaloid (PA) expression in the shoots and roots of a family including one Jacobaea vulgaris genotype and one Jacobaea aquatica genotype (parental genotypes), two F(1) hybrid genotypes, and 102 F(2) hybrid genotypes using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). We detected 37 PAs in the roots and shoots of J. vulgaris, J. aquatica and the hybrids. PA concentrations and compositions differed between genotypes, and between roots and shoots. Three otosenine-like PAs that only occurred in the shoots of parental genotypes were present in the roots of F(2) hybrids; PA compositions were sometimes novel in F(2) hybrids compared with parental genotypes, and in some cases transgressive PA expression occurred. We also found that PAs from within structural groups covaried both in the roots and in the shoots, and that PA expression was correlated between shoots and roots. Considerable and novel variation present among F(2) hybrids indicates that hybridization has a potential role in the evolution of PA diversity in the genus Jacobaea, and this hybrid system is useful for studying the genetic control of PA expression.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".