Genetics of Inbreeding Effects in Smooth Bromegrass
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Limited knowledge is available on the effects of deliberate selfing on morphological traits and genetic parameters in smooth bromegrass (Bromus inermis Leyss). To gain an enhanced understanding of these effects, 25 parental clones of smooth bromegrass along with 25 full‐sib (S1) and 25 half‐sib (open‐pollinated [OP]) progenies were generated in 2012 and used to assess the consequences of first‐generation inbreeding during 2013 and 2014 in a field experiment. A high genetic variation was observed among and within the S1 and OP progenies and parental clones. Different levels of inbreeding depression were observed for traits of days to anthesis, plant height, spread, and dry matter yield. Principal component analysis separated lines into three groups roughly corresponding to S1, OP, and parental clones, indicating that changes in mating system could rapidly change the genetic structure of populations. Large genetic variations were observed for inbreeding depression among the parental clones. Heritabilities ranged from 0.16 for dry matter (%) to 0.85 for spreading ability. The self‐pollinated progenies exhibited a higher heritability than the other progenies. The high correlations of forage yield with plant height, number of shoots per plant, and spread make it possible to improve forage yield via indirect selection. Results indicated that the magnitude of inbreeding depression varied among the genotypes and traits. Therefore, selection for low inbreeding depression rates is possible in this species, which may facilitate development of inbred lines for future breeding studies.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".