MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4291747225 · doi:10.5376/mpr.2022.12.0004

The Differences and Genetic Relationships of 4 Dendrobium Species Based on High Throughput GBS-SNP Markers

2022· article· en· W4291747225 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Meirong Ye, Xiaopeng Wang, Yuli Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicinal Plant Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGABA and Rice Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDendrobiumBiologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The differences and genetic relationships of 4 Dendrobium species ( Dendrobium huoshanense, Dendrobium officinale, Dendrobium moniliforme, Dendrobium Fanjingshanense ) were analyzed based on high throughput SNP markers obtained by GBS, using Dendrobium catenatum as the reference genome, for providing reference for the study of these 4 Dendrobium species. The results showed that the number of clean reads per each sample in D. huoshanense , D . officinale , D . moniliforme , D . Fanjingshanense were 1 300 724, 1 286 162, 1 380 009 and 1 170 337, respectively, and the number of SNPs per each sample were 1 507 746, 893 333, 1 364 605 and 1 227 006, respectively. The genetic structure based on Admixture software revealed that the samples of D . officinale were clustered into one branch, and the remaining Dendrobium samples were clustered into the other branch, when the best K value was 2; when k = 3, the samples of D . officinale were grouped into one cluster, some samples of D . huoshanense , all samples of D . moniliforme and D. fanjingshanense were grouped into the second cluster, and some samples of D . huoshanense were grouped into the third cluster; When k = 4, it was divided into four branches: the samples of D . officinale were grouped one branch, the samples of D . moniliforme and D . fanjingshanense were grouped one branch, the samples of D . huoshanense were divided into two branches, which was similar to the result of an unrooted neighbor-joining phylogenetic tree (NJ tree); Furthermore, principal coordinates analyses (PCoA) revealed that 91 Dendrobium samples were classed into three cluster. All samples of D. of ficinale and D. hu oshanense were grouped together, respectively, and the samples of D. monil iforme and D . fanjingshan ense were grouped together. According to the results of this study, the genetic relation of D. off icinale and the other 3 species of Dendrobium are relatively distant, and the genetic relationship of D. mo niliforme and D. fanjingshanense were relatively close, 72 samples of D . huoshanense in the study were divided into two branches, the genetic relationship in one of which was relatively close to D . moniliforme and D . fanjingshanense . The study verified that the genetic relationship between different Dendrobium species or different species of plants was investigated using SNPs detected by GBS.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.156
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.146 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicinal Plant ResearchSame topicGABA and Rice ResearchFrench-language works237,207