Genetic Relationship and Diversity in Some Ornamental Palms Based on Proteins and Randomly Amplified Polymorphic DNA Markers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For the first time, genetic diversity among 14 ornamental palm accessions originating from different countries and grown in different regions in Egypt were examined. Identification of genetic variation and phylogenetic relationships in ornamental palms would be useful for its genetic identification, improvement, and conservation. Genetic polymorphism was analyzed using the randomly amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) as well as protein markers. The electrophoretic pattern of protein analysis produced 21 bands distributed in all accessions with molecular sizes ranging from 11.8 to 99.3 KDa. Some accessions possessed some bands, which were absent in other accessions and could be used for their identification. Furthermore, 10 RAPD selected primers were employed to determine genetic variation among the 14 palm genotypes as well as to test the effectiveness of RAPD primers as a genetic marker. RAPD analysis revealed a high level of polymorphism (100%) among the studied accessions. A total number of 310 amplified bands were generated across the studied genotypes with an average of 30 bands per primer. Cluster analysis using sequence alignment was done to generate a dendrogram verifying the relationship among the 14 studied ornamental palms, with an average similarity matrix range of 0.00 to 0.08 and 0.39 to 0.93 for RAPD and protein markers, respectively. It is concluded that, both SDS-protein and RAPD markers are equally important for genetic analysis and are suitable for the characterization of ornamental palm collection.
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 | 0.002 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".