Genetic analysis of grapevine root system architecture and loci associated gene networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Own-rooted grapevines and grapevine rootstocks are vegetatively propagated from cuttings and have an adventitious root system. Unraveling the genetic underpinnings of the adventitious root system architecture (RSA) is important for improving own-rooted and grafted grapevine sustainability for a changing climate. Grapevine RSA genetic analysis was conducted in an Vitis sp. ‘VRS-F2’ population. Nine root morphology, three total root system morphology, and two biomass traits that contribute to root anchorage and water and nutrient uptake were phenotyped. Quantitative trait loci (QTL) analysis was performed using a high density integrated GBS and rhAmpSeq genetic map. Thirty-one QTL were detected for eleven of the RSA traits (surface area, root volume, total root length, fresh weight, number of tips, forks or links, longest root and average root diameter, link length, and link surface area) revealing many small effects. Several QTL were colocated on chromosomes 1, 9, 13, 18, and 19. QTL with identical peak positions on chromosomes 1 or 13 were enriched for AP2-EREBP , AS2 , C2C2-CO , HMG , and MYB transcription factors, and QTL on chromosomes 9 or 13 were enriched for the ALFIN-LIKE transcription factor and regulation of autophagy pathways. QTL modeling for individual root traits identified eight models explaining 13.2 to 31.8% of the phenotypic variation. ‘Seyval blanc’ was the grandparent contributing to the allele models that included a greater surface area, total root length, and branching (number of forks and links) traits promoting a greater root density. In contrast, V. riparia ‘Manitoba 37’ contributed the allele for greater average branch length (link length) and diameter, promoting a less dense elongated root system with thicker roots. LATERAL ORGAN BOUNDARY DOMAIN (LBD or AS2/LOB) and the PROTODERMAL FACTOR (PFD2 and ANL2) were identified as important candidate genes in the enriched pathways underlying the hotspots for grapevine adventitious RSA. The combined QTL hotspot and trait modeling identified transcription factors, cell cycle and circadian rhythm genes with a known role in root cell and epidermal layer differentiation, lateral root development and cortex thickness. These genes are candidates for tailoring grapevine root system texture, density and length in breeding programs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".