Haplotype‐based genotyping‐by‐sequencing in oat genome research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a de novo genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS) analysis of short, 64-base tag-level haplotypes in 4657 accessions of cultivated oat, we discovered 164741 tag-level (TL) genetic variants containing 241224 SNPs. From this, the marker density of an oat consensus map was increased by the addition of more than 70000 loci. The mapped TL genotypes of a 635-line diversity panel were used to infer chromosome-level (CL) haplotype maps. These maps revealed differences in the number and size of haplotype blocks, as well as differences in haplotype diversity between chromosomes and subsets of the diversity panel. We then explored potential benefits of SNP vs. TL vs. CL GBS variants for mapping, high-resolution genome analysis and genomic selection in oats. A combined genome-wide association study (GWAS) of heading date from multiple locations using both TL haplotypes and individual SNP markers identified 184 significant associations. A comparative GWAS using TL haplotypes, CL haplotype blocks and their combinations demonstrated the superiority of using TL haplotype markers. Using a principal component-based genome-wide scan, genomic regions containing signatures of selection were identified. These regions may contain genes that are responsible for the local adaptation of oats to Northern American conditions. Genomic selection for heading date using TL haplotypes or SNP markers gave comparable and promising prediction accuracies of up to r = 0.74. Genomic selection carried out in an independent calibration and test population for heading date gave promising prediction accuracies that ranged between r = 0.42 and 0.67. In conclusion, TL haplotype GBS-derived markers facilitate genome analysis and genomic selection in oat.
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 | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".