Marker-Assisted Selection in <i>Camellia</i> Breeding Programs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Marker-assisted selection (MAS) has revolutionized the breeding of Camellia species, offering enhanced precision and efficiency in developing cultivars with desirable traits. This study provides a comprehensive overview of the advancements and applications of MAS in Camellia breeding programs. Key findings highlight the diversity and breeding objectives of Camellia species, the types and development of genetic markers, and the implementation of MAS strategies such as Marker-Assisted Backcrossing (MABC), Marker-Assisted Recurrent Selection (MARS), and Genomic Selection (GS). Advances in genomic technologies, including next-generation sequencing (NGS), genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS), genome-wide association studies (GWAS), and CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing, have significantly impacted MAS, enabling more accurate and efficient breeding. Unique insights from case studies demonstrate the practical applications and successes of MAS in enhancing disease resistance in Camellia japonica , improving cold tolerance in Camellia oleifera , and advancing tea quality in Camellia sinensis . This study expects to drive the development of superior Camellia varieties, ensuring sustainability and meeting market demands for both ornamental and economic purposes.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".