Identification of RAPD markers linked to recessive genes conferring siliqua shatter resistance in Brassica rapa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Shattering of siliquae causes significant seed loss in canola (Brassica napus) production worldwide. There is little genetic variation for resistance to shatter in canola and, hence, the trait has been studied in B. rapa. Previous studies have shown two randomly segregating recessive genes to be responsible for shatter resistance. Three random amplified polymorphic DNA markers were identified as being linked to shatter resistance using bulked segregant analysis in a F3B. rapa population. The population was derived from a cross between a shatter-susceptible Canadian cultivar and a shatter-resistant Indian line. Of the three markers, RAC-3900 and RX-71000 were linked to recessive sh1 and sh2 alleles, and SAC-201300 was linked to both dominant Sh1 and Sh2 alleles. The common marker for the dominant wild-type allele for the two loci was explained to have resulted from duplication of an original locus and the associated markers through chromosome duplication and rearrangements in the process of evolution of the modern B. rapa from its progenitor that had a lower number of chromosomes. Segregation data from double heterozygous F3 families, although limited, indicated the markers were not linked to each other and provided further evidence for the duplication hypothesis.
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".