Selfing and correlated paternity in relation to pollen management in western red cedar seed orchards
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We used microsatellite genetic markers to evaluate the mating system of western red cedar (Thuja plicata Donn ex D. Don) under various seed orchard pollen management schemes. We primarily examined whether supplemental mass pollination (SMP) can reduce the observed selfing rates. Pollen blowing and “hooding” were also examined in smaller tests. Only SMP was consistently effective in reducing the selfing rate, from 30% to 20%. The correlation of paternity was quite high (60%–90%) in two of three orchards, and in these two orchards the application of SMP reduced this correlation by about 10% as well. The correlation of paternity is the fraction of full-sibling vs. half-sibling progeny, and unbiased estimates can be obtained with few loci, even single loci, in contrast to other types of paternity analysis. We also find the microsatellite amplicon sizes should be pooled into “bins” of 2–4 nucleotides, owing to unintended errors of assay; otherwise the estimates are biased. This new feature of mating system estimation was incorporated into the computer program MLTR.
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) | 0.000 | 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".