Variability of red rot-resistant somaclones of sugarcane genotype S97US297 assessed by RAPD and SSR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sugarcane breeding under climatic conditions of Pakistan is very difficult due to unavailability of viable fuzz (seed). Somaclonal variation can provide an alternative for improvement of existing genotypes. Six hundred and twenty-seven somaclones were developed from sugarcane genotype S97US297, and protocols for callogenesis and organogenesis were developed using Murashige and Skoog medium. Two types of explants, leaf and pith, and two auxins, 2,4-dichlorophenoxy acetic acid and indole-3-acetic acid, were tested to optimize callogenesis for root establishment. Leaves as explants with 3.0 mg/L 2,4-dichlorophenoxy acetic acid gave the best results, both for callus induction and proliferation. Half-strength Murashige and Skoog medium with 1.5 mg/L indole-3-butyric acid proved to be the best for rooting. Red rot-resistant somaclones of the R(2) generation along with the parent were assessed for genetic variability at the molecular level using RAPD and SSR markers. Polymorphism based on RAPD and SSR was 32 and 67%, respectively. Polymorphic information content ranged from 0.06-0.45 for RAPD and 0.06-0.47 for SSR. We conclude that somaclonal variation of sugarcane varieties is sufficient to allow selection.
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".