MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386562898 · doi:10.5376/lgg.2023.14.0001

Genetic Diversity of Soybean Landraces with Different Seed Coat Color

2023· article· en· W4386562898 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yingnan Wang, Guangxun Qi, Hongkun Zhao, Cuiping Yuan, Xiaodong Liu, Yuqiu Li, Yumin Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueLegume Genomics and Genetics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoybean genetics and cultivation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyGenetic diversityCoatAlleleMicrosatelliteLocus (genetics)Genetic variationHorticultureBotanyGeneticsGenePopulationEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, the genetic diversity of 52 soybean landraces were analyzed using 60 SSR (Simple sequence repeat) markers. The results showed that a total of 545 alleles were detected by 60 pairs of SSR primers, with a range of 2-18 alleles and an average of 9.08 alleles per SSR locus. The gene diversity of 60 SSR markers was 0.4529-0.9210, with an average of 0.7579; the polymorphism information content was 0.3562-0.9157, with an average of 0.7288. The results showed that the genetic diversity of black and green soybeans was relatively high. The results of cluster analysis showed that 52 soybean landraces could be divided into 5 groups. AMOVA analysis showed that 11.27% of the genetic variation existed among groups. The Fst between yellow and black seed coat soybean, and the Fst between yellow and light green seed coat soybean were 0.0788 and 0.0867, respectively, indicating moderate genetic differentiation. This study can provide reference information for further utilization of soybean landraces and genetic improvement of black and green soybean varieties.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.172 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLegume Genomics and GeneticsSame topicSoybean genetics and cultivationFrench-language works237,207