Multitrait genome‐wide association analysis of <i>Populus trichocarpa</i> identifies key polymorphisms controlling morphological and physiological traits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Genome‐wide association studies (GWAS) have great promise for identifying the loci that contribute to adaptive variation, but the complex genetic architecture of many quantitative traits presents a substantial challenge. We measured 14 morphological and physiological traits and identified single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP)‐phenotype associations in a Populus trichocarpa population distributed from California, USA to British Columbia, Canada. We used whole‐genome resequencing data of 882 trees with more than 6.78 million SNPs, coupled with multitrait association to detect polymorphisms with potentially pleiotropic effects. Candidate genes were validated with functional data. Broad‐sense heritability ( H 2 ) ranged from 0.30 to 0.56 for morphological traits and 0.08 to 0.36 for physiological traits. In total, 4 and 20 gene models were detected using the single‐trait and multitrait association methods, respectively. Several of these associations were corroborated by additional lines of evidence, including co‐expression networks, metabolite analyses, and direct confirmation of gene function through RNAi. Multitrait association identified many more significant associations than single‐trait association, potentially revealing pleiotropic effects of individual genes. This approach can be particularly useful for challenging physiological traits such as water‐use efficiency or complex traits such as leaf morphology, for which we were able to identify credible candidate genes by combining multitrait association with gene co‐expression and co‐methylation data.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".