MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Inter-simple sequence repeat (ISSR)-PCR analysis to assess genetic diversity in a collection of wild cloudberry (<i>Rubus chamaemorus</i>L.) clones

2007· article· en· W2317261265 on OpenAlexaffabout
Samir C. Debnath

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Horticultural Science and Biotechnology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBerry genetics and cultivation research
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenetic diversityBiologyUPGMAGenetic variationGermplasmAnalysis of molecular varianceGenetic variabilityMicrosatelliteGeneticsBotanyGenotypeGenetic structureAllelePopulationGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SummaryForty-eight wild cloudberry (Rubus chamaemorus L.) clones, collected from four Canadian Provinces, were assessed for genetic variability using inter-simple sequence repeat (ISSR)-PCR methods. Nine primers generated 138 polymorphic ISSR bands. A substantial degree of genetic diversity was found among the wild collection. Cluster analysis by the unweighted pair-group method with arithmetic averages (UPGMA) separated the 48 wild clones into six main clusters, and identified the one remaining clone as an outlier. Furthermore, within four of the clusters, the clones tended to form sub-clusters that were in agreement with a principal coordinate (PCO) analysis. Geographical distribution explained 8% of the total variation revealed by analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA). The ISSR markers detected a sufficient degree of polymorphism to differentiate among cloudberry clones, making this technology valuable for germplasm management, and more efficient choices of parents in current cloudberry breeding programmes.

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)0.002
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 score0.802
Threshold uncertainty score0.300

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations13
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Horticultural Science and BiotechnologySame topicBerry genetics and cultivation researchFrench-language works237,207