MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2789308013 · doi:10.1139/cjb-2017-0164

Nuclear genome size variation in the allopolyploid <i>Onosma arenaria</i> – <i>O. pseudoarenaria</i> species group: methodological issues and revised data

2018· article· en· W2789308013 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Vladislav Kolarčík, Valéria Kocová, Danka Caković, Tatiana Kačmárová, Juraj Piovár, Pavol Mártonfi

Bibliographic record

VenueBotany · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Parasitism and Resistance
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSoochow UniversityVedecká Grantová Agentúra MŠVVaŠ SR a SAVMinistry of EnvironmentUniversität Wien
KeywordsGenome sizeBiologyGenomeNuclear DNABotanyGeneticsGeneMitochondrial DNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We used flow cytometry (FCM) to investigate genome size variation in two polymorphic allopolyploids, Onosma arenaria Waldst. and Kit. and O. pseudoarenaria Schur, in Central Europe and the Balkan Peninsula. An intercalating DNA stain, propidium iodide (PI), and internal standardization were used. Our data showed that cytosolic compounds may be present in FCM samples and could inhibit, or more frequently promote, PI intercalation. In the absence of PI intercalation interference, leaf-based genome size estimates were observed to be lower than seed-based ones in O. pseudoarenaria, whereas no difference was recorded in O. arenaria. In incubation tests, genome size values frequently increase after a longer staining period. For final genome size measurements, we applied the FCM protocol based on seed material using a ∼150 min incubation period, and provide evidence of mean genome size variation among populations of both species. Two and four natural genome size groups were revealed in O. arenaria and O. pseudoarenaria respectively. Group mean genome sizes varied considerably in both O. arenaria (5.36–5.76 pg) and O. pseudoarenaria (5.98–6.58 pg). This extensive genome size variation is attributed to unexplored taxonomic heterogenity in both taxa. Future taxonomic revision of the group may be supported with genome size measurements obtained using an appropriately standardized methodology.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations7
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanySame topicPlant Parasitism and ResistanceFrench-language works237,207