MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2531892472 · doi:10.2135/cropsci2016.01.0031

QTL Identification for Brace‐Root Traits of Maize in Different Generations and Environments

2016· article· en· W2531892472 on OpenAlexaff
Dongdong Gu, Xiupeng Mei, Tingting Yu, Nana Sun, De Fu Xu, Chaoxian Liu, Yilin Cai

Bibliographic record

VenueCrop Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Agriculture
FundersFundamental and Frontier Research Project of Chongqing
KeywordsQuantitative trait locusBraceBiologyPopulationRoot (linguistics)TraitLateral rootHorticultureAgronomyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Elucidating the correlations among maize ( Zea mays L.) brace‐root traits and identifying the quantitative trait loci (QTL) that control the traits are important for genetic improvement of brace‐root traits. Two maize inbred lines, Yi17 (well‐developed root system) and Yi16 (poorly developed root system), an F 2 population derived from their cross containing 276 individuals, and an F 2:3 population containing 241 families were used to analyze the correlations among brace‐root traits and determine the QTL for brace‐root traits at Xiema and Hechuan in 2014 and 2015. All brace‐root traits were highly significantly correlated with each other. In particular, brace‐root diameter was highly correlated with brace‐root fresh weight ( r = 0.730), brace‐root dry weight ( r = 0.729), root fresh weight ( r = 0.734), and root dry weight ( r = 0.754). A total of 212 simple sequence repeat (SSR) markers were used to develop a genetic map based on the F 2 population. The total length of the genetic map was 1558.9 cM, with a mean interval of 7.35 cM between adjacent markers. Ninety‐three QTL controlling the brace‐root traits were detected in generations F 2 at Xiema in 2014 and F 2:3 at Xiema and Hechuan in 2015. However, only two consistent major QTL were identified in F 2:3 generation—qBRTN8b for brace‐root tier number and qBRD8b for brace‐root diameter. The qBRTN8b was located in the mmc0181 to bnlg1031 interval (bin 8.06) on chromosome 8, which explained 32.64% (at Xiema) and 16.18% (at Hechuan) of phenotypic variation. The qBRD8b was mapped in the umc2367 to umc1846 interval (bin 8.05) on chromosome 8, which explained 14.28% (at Xiema) and 10.41% (at Hechuan) of phenotypic variation. Moreover, three new important chromosomal regions harboring QTL for brace‐root traits were detected—bins 5.04, 6.06, and 8.05 to 8.06. These results could provide a very important reference for evaluating root traits under field conditions and for fine mapping QTL of brace‐root traits in maize.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.362
Threshold uncertainty score0.104

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations22
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCrop ScienceSame topicGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and AnimalsFrench-language works237,207