Characterization of the chloroplast genome of medicinal herb <i>Polygonatum cyrtonema</i> and identification of molecular markers by comparative analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Polygonatum cyrtonema Hua is a traditional Chinese herb medicine, and it is widely distributed in China. The intrageneric taxonomy and phylogenetic relationships within Polygonatum have long been controversial due to their morphological similarity and lacking special DNA barcodes. In this paper, the complete chloroplast genome is a relatively conserved quadripartite structure including a large single copy region of 84 711 bp, a small single copy region of 18 210 bp, and a pair of inverted repeats region of 26 142 bp. A total of 342 simple sequence repeats were identified, and most of them were found to be composed of A/T, including 126 mono-nucleotides and 179 di-nucleotides. Nucleotide diversity was analyzed and eight highly variable regions (psbl∼trnT-CGU, atpF∼atpH, trnT-GGU∼psbD, psaJ∼rps20, trnL-UAG∼ndhD, ndhG∼ndhl, ndhA, and rpl32∼ccsA) were identified as potential molecular markers. Phylogenetic analysis based on the whole chloroplast genome showed that P. cyrtonema, within the family Asparagaceae, is closely related to Polygonatum sibiricum and Polygonatum kingianum. The sequence matK, trnT-GGU & ccsA, and ndhG∼ndhA were identified as three DNA barcodes. The assembly and comparative analysis of P. cyrtonema complete chloroplast genome will provide essential molecular information about the evolution and molecular biology for further study.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".