Map Position and Expression of the Genes in the 38 Region of Drosophila
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the completion of the Drosophila genome sequence, an important next step is to extract its biological information by systematic functional analysis of genes. We have produced a high-resolution genetic map of cytological region 38 of Drosophila using 41 deficiency stocks that provide a total of 54 breakpoints within the region. Of a total of 45 independent P-element lines that mapped by in situ hybridization to the region, 14 targeted 7 complementation groups within the 38 region. Additional EMS, X-ray, and spontaneous mutations define a total of 17 complementation groups. Because these two pools partially overlap, the completed analysis revealed 21 distinct complementation groups defined by point mutations. Seven additional functions were defined by trans-heterozygous combinations of deficiencies, resulting in a total of 28 distinct functions. We further produced a developmental expression profile for the 760 kb from 38B to 38E. Of 135 transcription units predicted by GENSCAN, 22 have at least partial homology to mobile genetic elements such as transposons and retroviruses and 17 correspond to previously characterized genes. We analyzed the developmental expression pattern of the remaining genes using poly(A)(+) RNA from ovaries, early and late embryos, larvae, males, and females. We discuss the correlation between GENSCAN predictions and experimentally confirmed transcription units, the high number of male-specific transcripts, and the alignment of the genetic and physical maps in cytological region 38.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".