Potential of the C Genome of Different Variants of <i>Brassica oleracea</i> for the Improvement of Agronomic and Seed Quality Traits of <i>B. napus</i> Canola
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The narrow genetic base of Brassica napus L. canola, especially of its C genome, is an impediment for continued improvement of this crop. We investigated the gene pools of different variants of B. oleracea L. to improve agronomic and seed quality traits of B. napus canola. For this, B. napus canola inbred populations were developed from six interspecific crosses, involving a single B. napus canola line and six accessions of B. oleracea belonging to four variants of this species, following two breeding techniques (F 2 – and BC 1 –derived lines). Among these, the population derived from crossing with var. italica gave the greatest seed yield and also had shorter duration of flowering than most of the other populations. The population developed using var. botrytis had the highest seed oil content, and seed yield was comparable with the population developed using var. italica . Populations based on var. capitata had the lowest oil but greater protein content than most of the populations. Several lines from these interspecific crosses exceeded seed yield of the B. napus parent and also had acceptable agronomic and seed quality traits. Comparing the two breeding techniques, the F 2 –derived population gave greater yield than the BC 1 –derived population, whereas the BC 1 –derived population flowered and matured earlier than the F 2 –derived population. Genetic distance of the inbred lines from the B. napus parent showed positive correlation of r ≥ 0.4 with days to flowering and seed protein content and negative correlation with seed oil content, whereas correlation with seed yield was negative and weak ( r = −0.18). Thus, the results showed that the B. oleracea gene pool, especially var. italica and botrytis , can be used to improve spring B. napus canola, as well as to broaden the genetic base of this crop.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".