MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2394762552 · doi:10.1016/j.pld.2015.12.002

Characterization of 24 microsatellite markers in Primula chungensis (Primulaceae), a distylous–homostylous species, using MiSeq sequencing

2016· article· en· W2394762552 on OpenAlexaff
Wei Zhou, Haidong Li, Zhikun Wu, Spencer C. H. Barrett, Li D, Hong Wang

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Diversity · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Yunnan ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsOutcrossingSelfingBiologyMicrosatellitePrimulaceaePrimulaGenetic diversityPopulationLoss of heterozygosityMating systemAlleleLocus (genetics)Population geneticsGeneticsEvolutionary biologyBotanyMatingGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Primula chungensis is a species with considerable floral and mating-system variation, including distylous (outcrossing), homostylous (selfing) and mixed populations that contain both outcrossing and selfing forms. We isolated 24 microsatellite markers from P. chungensis using Illumina MiSeq sequencing. Polymorphism and genetic diversity were then measured based on a sample of 24 individuals from a natural population in southern Tibet. All loci were polymorphic with the number of alleles per locus ranging from 2 to 4. The observed and expected heterozygosity ranged from 0 to 1 and 0.219 to 0.708, respectively. The microsatellite markers we have identified will serve as valuable tools for the investigation of the population genetic structure and phylogeography of P. chungensis and will inform models of the evolutionary history of mating systems in the species.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant DiversitySame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207