A sexual hybrid and autopolyploids detected in seed from crosses between <i>Neslia paniculata</i> and <i>Camelina sativa</i> (Brassicaceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is important to understand the probability of hybridization and potential for introgression of transgenic crop alleles into wild populations as part of pre-release risk assessment. Here we completed bidirectional crosses between the emerging crop, camelina [Camelina sativa (L.) Crantz] and its weedy relative, ball mustard [Neslia paniculata (L.) Desv.]. Ball mustard is a self-compatible annual that produces hard ball-like seeds similar to canola or mustard seed in size and shape. A total of 1593 crosses were completed and collected with camelina as the maternal parent, while 3253 crosses were successfully collected in the reverse direction. Putatively hybrid seedlings were screened with flow cytometry and species-specific nuclear ribosomal internal transcribed spacer (ITS) markers. Three plants had DNA contents close to expectations for hybrids, but only one of these, formed on camelina, had the expected ITS markers. This hybrid exhibited low fertility, and neither self-pollination nor backcrossing produced viable progeny. The other two plants, formed on ball mustard, had high pollen and seed fertility and were identified as ball mustard neoautotetraploids. Therefore, the hybridization rate between camelina and ball mustard is relatively low at one in 20 000 ovules pollinated when camelina is the maternal parent. However, autotetraploids may form frequently in ball mustard, and tetraploid populations may exist in nature.
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) | 0.001 | 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".