MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991242770 · doi:10.3897/compcytogen.v6i3.3543

Identifying parental chromosomes and genomic rearrangements in animal hybrid complexes of species with small genome size using Genomic In Situ Hybridization (GISH)

2012· article· en· W1991242770 on OpenAlexaff
Massimiliano Rampin, Ke Bi, James P. Bogart, Maria João Collares‐Pereira

Bibliographic record

VenueComparative Cytogenetics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicChromosomal and Genetic Variations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersFundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
KeywordsBiologyGenomePloidyMetaphaseChromosomeIn situ hybridizationGenome sizeComparative genomic hybridizationFish <Actinopterygii>GeneticsKaryotypeEvolutionary biologyFluorescence in situ hybridizationGeneFishery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Genomic In Situ Hybridization (GISH) is a powerful tool to identify and to quantify genomic constituents in allopolyploids, and is mainly based on hybridization of highly and moderate repetitive sequences. In animals, as opposed to plants, GISH has not been widely used in part because there are technical problems in obtaining informative results. Using the allopolyploid Squalius alburnoides Steindachner, 1866 fish complex as a model system, we succeeded in overcoming methodological constraints when dealing with parental species with a small genome size. This hybridogenetic complex has biotypes with different genome compositions and ploidy levels, but parental chromosomes are small, morphologically very similar and therefore cannot be distinguished by conventional cytogenetic approaches. Specimens have a small genome (C-value1.2 pg) with a low level of highly and moderate repetitive sequences, mainly located at pericentromeric chromosome regions. Since it is well known that probe annealing depends on probe concentration and hybridization time to obtain uniform hybridization signals along the chromosome arms, we progressively increased the amount of labeled probes from 100ng up to 1µg and the incubation time from overnight up to 5 days. We also made other smaller improvements. Results showed a clear enhancement of signals with respect to previous data, allowing an accurate and reproducible assignment of the parental genomes in both diploid and triploid fish.It was thus evidenced that high probes' concentrations and long incubation time are the key to obtain, without extra image editing, uniform and reliable hybridization signals in metaphase chromosomes of animal hybrids from species with small genome size.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.111
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.165 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations14
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComparative CytogeneticsSame topicChromosomal and Genetic VariationsFrench-language works237,207