MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387034837 · doi:10.48130/frures-2023-0032

Large-scale apple GWAS reveals <i>NAC18.1</i> as a master regulator of ripening traits

2023· article· en· W4387034837 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sophie Watts, Zoë Migicovsky, Sean Myles

Bibliographic record

VenueFruit Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicHorticultural and Viticultural Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityAcadia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyRipeningSingle-nucleotide polymorphismGeneticsGenome-wide association studyAlleleHorticultureGeneGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Apple quality traits such as fruit texture, sugar content, and firmness retention during storage are key targets for breeders. Understanding the genetic control of fruit quality traits can enable the development of genetic markers, useful for marker-assisted breeding of new apple cultivars. We made use of over 260,000 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) genotyped across 1,054 apple accessions from Canada's Apple Biodiversity Collection to perform genome-wide association for 21 fruit quality and phenology traits. We identified two loci on chromosome 15 and 16 associated with phenolic content and a locus on chromosome 10 associated with softening. In addition, we determined that allelic variation at the <italic>NAC18.1</italic> transcription factor was associated with numerous traits including harvest date, firmness at harvest, and firmness after storage. Our analyses suggest that <italic>NAC18.1</italic> independently acts as a high level regulator of multiple ripening related traits and we propose a model for the allelic effects at <italic>NAC18.1</italic> on apple ripening and softening.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.868
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.247 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations17
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFruit ResearchSame topicHorticultural and Viticultural ResearchFrench-language works237,207