The construction of a high-density consensus genetic map for soybean based on SNP markers derived from genotyping-by-sequencing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genetic linkage maps are used to localize markers on the genome based on the recombination frequency. Most often, these maps are based on the segregation observed within a single biparental population of limited size ( n < 300) where relatively few recombination events are sampled and in which some genomic regions are monomorphic because both parents carry the same alleles. Together, these two limitations affect both the resolution and extent of genome coverage of such maps. Consensus genetic maps overcome the limitations of individual genetic maps by merging the information from multiple segregating populations derived from a greater diversity of parental combinations, thus increasing the number of recombination events and reducing the number of monomorphic regions. The aim of this study was to construct a high-density consensus genetic map for single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers obtained through a genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS) approach. Individual genetic maps were generated from six F4:5 mapping populations ( n = 278–365), totaling 1857 individuals. The six linkage maps were then merged to produce a consensus map comprising a total of 16 311 mapped SNPs that jointly cover 99.5% of the soybean genome with only two gaps larger than 10 cM. Compared to previous soybean consensus maps, it offers a more extensive and uniform coverage.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".