Genome and chromosome structure: Twelve dynamic and evolving genomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chromosomes are not inert structures that haul the genome through cell division. The dynamic properties of chromosomes, during the cell cycle, the lifetime of the organism and across evolutionary time, featured prominently at the 49(th) Annual Drosophila Research Conference. Platform presentations, workshops and posters focused on many aspects of chromosome structure and function including chromosome interactions such as trans-silencing and pairing between homologous and non-homologous chromosomes, specialized portions of the chromosome including the centromere and telomeres, the structure, function and evolution of the large heterochromatic domains such as the Y and 4(th) chromosomes, centric heterochromatin and subtelomeric heterochromatin. The speed of evolutionary changes in these regions, and the consequences for speciation and hybrid-incompatibility, were recurring themes. Finally, there was considerable new insight offered into the mechanics by which chromosomes are rearranged and changes in the types of alterations occurring over the lifetime of the organism, which can result in novel genes and gene flow between chromosomes. The availability of the twelve sequenced Drosophila genomes has allowed new insights into the structure, function and evolutionary transformation of chromosomes and genomes that will continue to transform our view of the chromosome as a dynamic and flexible entity that houses and regulates the genome.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".