Transcript analysis in two alfalfa salt tolerance selected breeding populations relative to a non-tolerant population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the growing limitations on arable land, alfalfa (a widely cultivated, low-input forage) is now being selected to extend cultivation into saline lands for low-cost biofeedstock purposes. Here, minerals and transcriptome profiles were compared between two new salinity-tolerant North American alfalfa breeding populations and a more salinity-sensitive western Canadian alfalfa population grown under hydroponic saline conditions. All three populations accumulated two-fold higher sodium in roots than shoots as a function of increased electrical conductivity. At least 50% of differentially expressed genes (p < 0.05) were down-regulated in the salt-sensitive population growing under high salinity, while expression remained unchanged in the saline-tolerant populations. In particular, most reduction in transcript levels in the salt-sensitive population was observed in genes specifying cell wall structural components, lipids, secondary metabolism, auxin and ethylene hormones, development, transport, signalling, heat shock, proteolysis, pathogenesis-response, abiotic stress, RNA processing, and protein metabolism. Transcript diversity for transcription factors, protein modification, and protein degradation genes was also more strongly affected in salt-tolerant CW064027 than in salt-tolerant Bridgeview and salt-sensitive Rangelander, while both saline-tolerant populations showed more substantial up-regulation in redox-related genes and B-ZIP transcripts. The report highlights the first use of bulked genotypes as replicated samples to compare the transcriptomes of obligate out-cross breeding populations in alfalfa.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".