Miscanthus: Inter- and Intraspecific Genome Size Variation Among M. × Giganteus, M. Sinensis, M. Sacchariflorus Accessions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract SinceM. sinensisAnderss.,M. sacchariflorus(Maxim.) Hack. andM. ×giganteusJ.M.Greef & Deuter ex Hodk. and Renvoize have considerably the highest potential for biomass production amongMiscanthusAnderss. species, there is an urgent need to broaden the knowledge about cytological characteristics required for their improvement. In this study our objectives were to assess the genome size variation among eighteenMiscanthusaccessions, as well as estimation of the monoploid genome size (2C and Cx) of theM. sinensiscultivars, which have not been analyzed yet. The characterization of threeMiscanthusspecies was performed with the use of flow cytometry and analysis of the stomatal length. The triploid (2n = 3x = 57)M. sinensis‘Goliath’ andM. ×giganteusclones possessed the highest 2C DNA content (8.34 pg and 7.43 pg, respectively). The intermediate 2C-values were found in the nuclei of the diploid (2n = 2x = 38)M. sinensisaccessions (5.52–5.72 pg), whereas they were the lowest in the diploid (2n = 2x = 38)M. sacchariflorusecotypes (4.58–4.59 pg). The presented study revealed interspecific variation of nuclear DNA content (P<0.01) and therefore allowed for recognition of particular taxa, inter- and intraspecific hybrids and prediction of potential parental components. Moreover, intraspecific genome size variation (P<0.01) was observed inM. sinensiscultivars at 3.62%. The values of the stomatal size obtained for the triploidM. ×giganteus‘Great Britain’ (mean 30.70 μm) or ‘Canada’ (mean 29.67 μm) and diploidM. sinensis‘Graziella’ (mean 29.96 μm) did not differ significantly, therefore this parameter is not recommended for ploidy estimation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".