Genetic Variation of <i>Channa maculata</i>, <i>Channa argus</i> and Their Hybrid by AFLP Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we adopted AFLP molecular marker technique to analyze the genetic differences of 85 individuals of Channa maculata , Channa algus and their hybrid ( C. maculata ♀× C. argus ♂), among which Channa maculata and Chonna argus was 30 respectively, their hybrid was 25. The results showed that tota1 of 459 bands were obtained by 11 primer combinations, of which 350 were polymorphic bands, the percentage of polymorphic loci was 76.25%, the average of polymorphic bands per primer combination was 31.8. There were 169 discrepant bands could be distinguished C. maculata and C. argus steadily, 78 of those were paternal ( C. argus ) specific bands and 72 were entailed on hybrid, 89 of those were maternal ( C. maculata ) specific bands and 71 were entailed on hybrid. In addition, there were 3 nonparental bands in hybrid. The results of analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA) found that the Nei’s unbiased measures of genetic identity between C. maculata and C. argus was 0.516 1, while those between hybrid and C. maculata , hybrid and C. argus was 0.718 9 and 0.747 6. And their Nei’s unbiased measures of genetic distance were respectively 0.661 5, 0.330 0 and 0.290 9, respectively, the analysis of molecular variance analysis (AMOVA) displayed that. There was significantly genetic differentiation among C. maculata , C. argus and the hybrid. On the other hand, the UPGMA cluster analysis revealed that, individuals of C. maculata and C. argus could be distinguished into two populations, but most individuals of hybrid scattered in populations of C. maculata and C. argus . In populations cluster analysis hybrid and C. argus populations were cluster firstly, then clustered with C. maculata . The preliminary analysis result indicated that the hybrid was supposed to be isolation cultivated because of high promiscuous possibility among C. maculata, C. argus and their hybrid. The results of this article would provide experimental evidence for genetic assaying of C. maculata , C. argus and their hybrid and the refference for reasonable utilization of their germplasms.
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".