MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2554926081 · doi:10.1139/gen-2016-0150

Collinearity between potato (<i>Solanum tuberosum</i> L.) and wild relatives assessed by comparative cytogenetic mapping

2016· article· en· W2554926081 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Paola Gaiero, José van de Belt, F. Vilaró, M. Eric Schranz, Pablo Speranza, Hans de Jong

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Pathogens and Resistance
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidad de la República UruguayInstituto Nacional de Investigación AgropecuariaAgencia Nacional de Investigación e InnovaciónComisión Sectorial de Investigación CientíficaInstituto Nacional de Investigación y Tecnología Agraria y Alimentaria
KeywordsBiologyIntrogressionSolanum tuberosumGeneticsGenomeChromosomePolyploidSolanumGeneBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A major bottleneck to introgressive hybridization is the lack of genome collinearity between the donor (alien) genome and the recipient crop genome. Structural differences between the homeologs may create unbalanced segregation of chromosomes or cause linkage drag. To assess large-scale collinearity between potato and two of its wild relatives (Solanum commersonii and Solanum chacoense), we used BAC-FISH mapping of sequences with known positions on the RH potato map. BAC probes could successfully be hybridized to the S. commersonii and S. chachoense pachytene chromosomes, confirming their correspondence with linkage groups in RH potato. Our study shows that the order of BAC signals is conserved. Distances between BAC signals were quantified and compared; some differences found suggest either small-scale rearrangements or reduction/amplification of repeats. We conclude that S. commersonii and S. chacoense are collinear with cultivated Solanum tuberosum on the whole chromosome scale, making these amenable species for efficient introgressive hybridization breeding.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score0.179

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 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

Citations12
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicPlant Pathogens and ResistanceFrench-language works237,207