MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197471686 · doi:10.5376/ijmec.2021.11.0002

Identification and Genetic Relationship Analysis of <i>Torreya</i> Based on nrDNA ITS Sequence

2021· article· en· W3197471686 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wei Zhuo, Yan Liu, Juan Bai, Rong Xiang, Shenge Lu, Fengming Ren

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Molecular Ecology and Conservation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant and Fungal Species Descriptions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyPhylogenetic treeGenetic distanceDNA barcodingSequence analysisDNA sequencingGeneticsBotanyEvolutionary biologyGenetic variationGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to evaluate the identification ability of nrDNA ITS sequences on Torreya , this study used ITS sequence and four different analysis methods (BLAST, K2P genetic distance, SNP analysis, NJ tree) to identify species of Torreya , and established phylogenetic trees to discuss their phylogenetic relationships. The results showed that the length of 48 ITS sequences was 1 095 bp~1 105 bp, the average intraspecies genetic distance was 0.001 6 and the average interspecies genetic distance was 0.015 0. At the species level, BLAST alignment and NJ tree had the highest efficiency in Torreya . The SNP loci analysis could effectively identify T. grandis cv . ‘ Merrillii ’ and T. grandis . The analysis of genetic relationship showed that all the other species of Torreya  were single-line branches, but the quince tree of T. yunnanensis  and T. fargesii  were clustered into a cluster in the ML tree, indicating that the two were closely related. This provided evidence for the nuclear genome sequence proposed the incorporation of T. yunnanensis  and T. fargesii . This study showed that ITS sequence could be used as a DNA barcode for the identification of Torreya , and providing reference for the identification and systematic relationship of Torreya.

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 score0.849
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Molecular Ecology and ConservationSame topicPlant and Fungal Species DescriptionsFrench-language works237,207