MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168889777 · doi:10.1139/g10-060

Genetic effects of major QTLs controlling low-temperature germinability in different genetic backgrounds in rice (<i>Oryza sativa</i>L.)

2010· article· en· W2168889777 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Natsuko Iwata, Kenji Fujino

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyJaponicaQuantitative trait locusOryza sativaJaponica riceEpistasisPopulationGerminationAlleleCultivarAgronomyChromosomeHorticultureGeneticsBotanyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of QTLs are demonstrated basically within the population used in the original QTL analysis as the difference between the alleles of the parental varieties. For the efficient use of QTLs in breeding programs, it is necessary to assess whether the QTL exhibits its genetic effect when it is introgressed into different genetic backgrounds. Extensive studies of tolerance to low temperature at the seed germination stage (called low-temperature germinability) in rice revealed that 2 major QTLs on chromosomes 3 and 11, qLTG3-1 and qLTG11, have large effects. This study assessed the effects of these 2 QTLs from an aus variety, Kasalath, in different genetic backgrounds of 3 japonica varieties, Hoshinoyume, Hayamasari, and Koshihikari. Backcrossed progenies and chromosome segment substitution lines showed that both qLTG3-1 and qLTG11 were effective in the Hoshinoyume and Koshihikari backgrounds, while only qLTG3-1 was effective in the Hayamasari background. The results in this study demonstrated that these 2 QTLs are useful for the improvement of low-temperature germinability in rice breeding programs. The results also indicated that low-temperature germinability in rice is governed by an epistatic interaction of qLTG11.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.863
Threshold uncertainty score0.879

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 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

Citations33
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and AnimalsFrench-language works237,207