MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3114064359 · doi:10.1080/23818107.2020.1857833

Genetic variation underlies the plastic response to shade of snapdragon plants (<i>Antirrhinum majus</i>L.)

2020· article· en· W3114064359 on OpenAlexaff
Mathilde Mousset, Sara Marin, Juliette Archambeau, Christel Blot, Vincent Bonhomme, Laura Garaud, Benoît Pujol

Bibliographic record

VenueBotany Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLeaf Properties and Growth Measurement
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
FundersH2020 European Research CouncilAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsAntirrhinum majusBiologyPhenotypic plasticityGenetic variationBotanyShade avoidanceEcologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A classic example of phenotypic plasticity in plants is the set of traits that change in response to shade. There is widespread evidence that plants in low light conditions often avoid shade by growing taller or by increasing their photosynthetic efficiency, i.e. the shade avoidance syndrome. Whether this plasticity might evolve in response to natural selection depends upon the presence of its standing genetic variation in wild populations. There is limited evidence for heritable standing variation in the plastic response of plants to shade. In this study, we used an experimental common garden approach to investigate this plastic response in snapdragon plants (Antirrhinum majus L.) originating from four natural populations from the Mediterranean region. Our results showed that individual plants reacted strongly to the presence of shade by growing longer shoots, longer internodes, and increasing their specific leaf area in these four populations. Our results also revealed genetic variation for the plastic response within these populations, as well as little genetic constraints to its evolution. Our findings imply that natural populations of A. majus harbour standing genetic variation for phenotypic plasticity in response to shade, providing them the potential to evolve in response to selection.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.147

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.163 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotany LettersSame topicLeaf Properties and Growth MeasurementFrench-language works237,207