Genetic Relationships of Cultivated Flax and Its Wild Progenitor as Revealed by 454 Pyrosequencing, Sanger Resequencing and Microsatellite Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Flax (Linum usitatissimum L.), as the earliest oil and fiber crop, is a model plant for genetic inferences of plant domestication processes involving multiple domestication events. However, a puzzle has emerged from several genetic studies, as dehiscent cultivated flax is genetically more related to its progenitor pale flax (L. bienne Mill.), and winter cultivated flax is well mixed with oil or fiber cultivated flax, while capsular dehiscence and winter hardiness are the major characteristics of pale flax. For this, a comparative analysis was conducted with 16 Linum samples representing pale flax and four domestication groups of cultivated flax (oil, fiber, winter, and dehiscent) using 454 pyrosequencing, Sanger resequencing and microsatellite data. It was found that the genomic sampling of genetic variants from the three applied methods yielded similar genetic information on pale flax and four groups of cultivated flax. The revealed genetic relationships did not show significant departures from the previous findings, but instead supported an early, independent domestication of a primitive flax lineage for oil use, followed by a subsequent flax domestication process with multiple domestication events for capsular dehiscence, oil, fiber and winter hardiness. Domestication on capsular dehiscence occurred earlier than domestication on winter hardiness. Domestication on winter hardiness was more complicated than domestication on capsular dehiscence.
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".