MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981360778 · doi:10.3390/plants8110438

Developing Chloroplast Genomic Resources from 25 Avena Species for the Characterization of Oat Wild Relative Germplasm

2019· article· en· W2981360778 on OpenAlexafffund
Yong‐Bi Fu, Pingchuan Li, Bill Biligetu

Bibliographic record

VenuePlants · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsGenomeBiologyGermplasmPseudogeneGeneticsGeneGenomicsShotgun sequencingSequence assemblyReference genomeComparative genomicsGenome sizeBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chloroplast (cp) genomics will play an important role in the characterization of crop wild relative germplasm conserved in worldwide gene banks, thanks to the advances in genome sequencing. We applied a multiplexed shotgun sequencing procedure to sequence the cp genomes of 25 Avena species with variable ploidy levels. Bioinformatics analysis of the acquired sequences generated 25 de novo genome assemblies ranging from 135,557 to 136,006 bp. The gene annotations revealed 130 genes and their duplications, along with four to six pseudogenes, for each genome. Little differences in genome structure and gene arrangement were observed across the 25 species. Polymorphism analyses identified 1313 polymorphic sites and revealed an average of 277 microsatellites per genome. Greater nucleotide diversity was observed in the short single-copy region. Genome-wide scanning of selection signals suggested that six cp genes were under positive selection on some amino acids. These research outputs allow for a better understanding of oat cp genomes and evolution, and they form an essential set of cp genomic resources for the studies of oat evolutionary biology and for oat wild relative germplasm characterization.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.817
Threshold uncertainty score0.227

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlantsSame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207