MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2234028278 · doi:10.1139/g11-082

Population-based resequencing analysis of wild and cultivated barley revealed weak domestication signal of selection and bottleneck in the<i>Rrs2</i>scald resistance gene region

2012· article· en· W2234028278 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Yong‐Bi Fu

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWheat and Barley Genetics and Pathology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDomesticationBiologyHordeum vulgareNucleotide diversityPopulationGeneticsGenetic diversityPlant geneticsHaplotypeGeneAlleleGenomeBotanyPoaceae

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many plant disease resistance (R) genes have been cloned, but the potential of utilizing these plant R-gene genomic resources for genetic inferences of plant domestication history remains unexplored. A population-based resequencing analysis of the genomic region near the Rrs2 scald resistance gene was made in 51 accessions of wild and cultivated barley from 41 countries. Fifteen primer pairs were designed to sample the genomic region with a total length of 10 406 bp. More nucleotide diversity was found in wild (π = 0.01846) than cultivated (π = 0.01507) barley samples. Three distinct groups of 29 haplotypes were detected for all 51 samples, and they were well mixed with wild and cultivated barley samples from different countries and regions. The neutrality tests by Tajima's D were not significant, but a significant (P < 0.05) case by Fu and Li's D* and F* was found in the barley cultivar samples. The estimate of selection intensity by K(a)/K(s) was 0.691 in wild barley and 0.580 in cultivated barley. The estimate of the minimum recombination events was 16 in wild barley and 19 in cultivated barley. A coalescence simulation revealed a bottleneck intensity of 1.5 to 2 since barley domestication. Together, the domestication signal in the genomic region was weak both in human selection and domestication bottleneck.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.621
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations35
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicWheat and Barley Genetics and PathologyFrench-language works237,207