MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2379781446

Preliminary Study on Identification Flowering Chinese Cabbage Varieties by ISSR Molecular Markers

2010· article· en· W2379781446 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yu Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueSeed · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGarlic and Onion Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyJaccard indexGenetic diversityHorticultureGenetic similarityMolecular markerBotanyGeneticsGeneMathematicsPopulationMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study aimed to set up the ISSR reaction system of the flowering Chinese Cabbage,including the genomic DNA extraction,amplification,cycle time,primers screening.The results showed that the optimum temperature of a eggplant amplification was 48.0℃,and the best cycle time was 45cycle.4 primers were screened out from 49 ISSR primers totally to amplify the flowering Chinese Cabbage genome DNAs of 6 materials effectively,and 32 sites were amplified out totally,including 22 polymorphism sites with polymorphism rate of 68.80%.All of the 6 varieties could be differentiated from each other based on the fingerprints established by these specific bands.The Jaccard genetic similarity coefficients among flowering Chinese Cabbage vrieties were calculated by NTSYS-pc2.10e software.The genetic similarity coefficients among 6 flowering Chinese Cabbage varieties were between 0.19 and 0.77.The ISSR Markers showed that the higher genetic diversity of between materials.This study provided theoretical foundation to the seed purity identification and new varieties breeding of the chinese cabbage.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeedSame topicGarlic and Onion StudiesFrench-language works237,207