MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mapping Quantitative Trait Loci onto Chromosome-scale Pseudomolecules in Flax

2019· preprint· en· W3122781137 on OpenAlexafffund
Frank M. You, Sylvie Cloutier

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Disease Resistance and Genetics
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsQuantitative trait locusFamily-based QTL mappingBiologyGeneticsSingle-nucleotide polymorphismChromosomePopulationInclusive composite interval mappingSNPGene mappingComputational biologyGeneGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantitative trait loci (QTL) are genomic regions associated with phenotype variation of quantitative traits in a population. To date, a total of 267 QTL for 29 quantitative traits have been reported in 13 studies on flax. Of these, 200 QTL from 12 studies were identified based on genetic maps, scaffold sequences, or pre-released chromosome-scale pseudomolecules. Molecular markers for QTL identification differed across studies but were mainly based on simple sequence repeat (SSR) or single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers. This article provides methods with software tools and database files to uniquely map SSR and SNP markers from different references onto the recently released chromosome-scale pseudomolecules. Using these methods, 195 QTL were successfully sorted onto the 15 flax chromosomes and grouped into 133 co-located QTL clusters. Mapping of QTL from different studies to the same reference enables comparisons and facilitates genome-wide QTL analysis, candidate gene scanning, and breeding applications.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicPlant Disease Resistance and GeneticsFrench-language works237,207