MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048906205 · doi:10.3390/agronomy10081191

Genetics of Height and Branching in Faba Bean (Vicia faba)

2020· article· en· W3048906205 on OpenAlexaff
J. T. Hughes, Hamid Khazaeı, Albert Vandenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueAgronomy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGenetic and Environmental Crop Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersUniversity of Reading
KeywordsDwarfingBiologyVicia fabaDwarfismGeneticsGeneBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A better understanding of the genetics of plant architecture, including height and branching, could improve faba bean breeding for varieties with better fit into specific cropping systems. This study aimed to determine the inheritance and genetic interactions of the sources of the dwarf gene (dwf1) and semi-dwarf gene (dwarf1), and to investigate the genetics of branching in the faba bean. We chose inbred lines IG 12658 (dwarf, carrying dwf1) and Rinrei (semi-dwarf, carrying dwarf1) along with Aurora/2 and IG 114476 as sources of non-dwarf faba bean genotypes and crossed them (Aurora/2 × IG 12658, IG 114476 × IG 12658, Rinrei × IG 12658, IG 114476 × Rinrei, and Rinrei × Aurora/2). IG 114476 was also used as a genetic source of a highly branching phenotype and crossed with IG 12658, Rinrei, and Aurora/2 to study the genetics of branching. Parental lines, F1s, and F2 populations were evaluated under growth chamber and field conditions in 2018. The segregating F2 populations were tested for 3:1 single recessive gene inheritance using Chi-square tests. Both dwarfing/semi-dwarfing genes fit 3:1 recessive, and 15:1 for double recessive. Rinrei was not a true dwarf, and the gene creating the dwarf appearance reduced the initial growth rate, but this corrected over time. Multiple F2 populations were also tested for a 3:1 single dominant gene hypothesis for highly branched phenotypes. These populations showed a bell-shaped phenotypic distribution for branch number, with no discernable classes, and revealed that branching was likely quantitatively controlled. In conclusion, dwarfism and branching in faba bean were controlled qualitatively and quantitatively, respectively.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.210
Threshold uncertainty score0.102

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 head0.173
Teacher spread0.156 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations12
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgronomySame topicGenetic and Environmental Crop StudiesFrench-language works237,207