Comparative assessment of genetic diversity matrices and clustering methods in white Guinea yam (Dioscorea rotundata) based on morphological and molecular markers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the diversity and genetic relationships among and within crop germplasm is invaluable for genetic improvement. This study assessed genetic diversity in a panel of 173 D. rotundata accessions using joint analysis for 23 morphological traits and 136,429 SNP markers from the whole-genome resequencing platform. Various diversity matrices and clustering methods were evaluated for a comprehensive characterization of genetic diversity in white Guinea yam from West Africa at phenotypic and molecular levels. The translation of the different diversity matrices from the phenotypic and genomic information into distinct groups varied with the hierarchal clustering methods used. Gower distance matrix based on phenotypic data and identity by state (IBS) distance matrix based on SNP data with the UPGMA clustering method found the best fit to dissect the genetic relationship in current set materials. However, the grouping pattern was inconsistent (r = - 0.05) between the morphological and molecular distance matrices due to the non-overlapping information between the two data types. Joint analysis for the phenotypic and molecular information maximized a comprehensive estimate of the actual diversity in the evaluated materials. The results from our study provide valuable insights for measuring quantitative genetic variability for breeding and genetic studies in yam and other root and tuber crops.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".