MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406078209 · doi:10.5376/mpb.2024.15.0032

QTL Mapping of Resistance to Ear Rot in Maize Based on SNP Markers and Improvement of High-Yield and Disease-Resistance Traits

2024· article· en· W4406078209 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zhou Lan, Dongna Zhang, Shuling Wang, Yingji Zhang, Xuetao Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Plant Breeding · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDepartment of Science and Technology of Jilin Province
KeywordsBiologyQuantitative trait locusPlant disease resistanceResistance (ecology)SNPGeneticsYield (engineering)Marker-assisted selectionDiseaseFamily-based QTL mappingAgronomyBiotechnologyGenotypeGene mappingSingle-nucleotide polymorphismGeneMedicineChromosomePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ear rot is an important disease affecting maize production, resulting in serious yield loss and quality decline. Using a set of maize line populations, QTL mapping was performed to identify genomic regions associated with ear rot resistance. This study found several significant QTLS associated with ear rot resistance, some of which overlapped with regions controlling yield traits, suggesting that both resistance and yield could be improved. The SNP markers identified were used in marker-assisted selection (MAS) strategies to accelerate the development of high-yielding and disease-resistant maize varieties. The aim of this study was to use single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers to locate quantitative trait loci (QTL) for maize ear rot resistance, and to improve high yield and disease resistance. These findings provide important genetic insights into ear rot resistance in maize and provide a framework for future breeding efforts aimed at improving maize productivity and disease resistance.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.134
Threshold uncertainty score0.519

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Plant BreedingSame topicGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and AnimalsFrench-language works237,207