Molecular confirmation of varietal status in bottle gourd (<i>Lagenaria siceraria</i>) using genotyping-by-sequencing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
subspecies are sufficiently different to be considered as varieties, but they are assigned into different taxonomic ranks. Genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS) of 95 different accessions from the Nangui Abrogoua University collection was used to confirm the varietal status in bottle gourd. This analysis produced 22 575 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). Cluster analyses conducted with 2250 (9.96%) SNPs distinctly separated hard-shelled from soft-shelled types. Analysis of 23 SNPs located in 11 genes coding for traits that differentiate the two types of gourds revealed that genes in the soft-shelled types had about 21% fewer SNPs than genes within hard-shelled gourds, but the latter had more non-synonymous SNPs. Cluster analyses conducted with the 23 SNPs fitted well with the structure defined by the 2250 SNPs, suggesting the implication of these SNPs in the varietal differentiation of bottle gourd. These nucleotide changes along with the genetic relationships between the accessions provide molecular proof supporting the status of two varieties. To prevent the confusion inherent in the use of synonyms and homonyms in bottle gourd, we suggest the terms hard-shelled and soft-shelled to designate, respectively, the varieties used as utensils and those grown for their edible seeds.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".