Comparison of the structure and organization of the <i>rrna</i> operons of <i>Bouteloua gracilis</i> and <i>Zea mays</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aguado-Santacruz, G. A., Betancourt-Guerra, D. A., Siquerios-Cendón, T., Arévalo-Gallegos, S., Rivera-Chavira, B. E., Nevarez-Moorillon, G. V., Moreno-Gómez, B. and Rascón-Cruz, Q. 2011. Comparison of the structure and organization of therrnaoperons of Bouteloua gracilisandZea mays. Can. J. Plant Sci. 91: 107–116. We studied the genomic structure of Bouteloua gracilis chloroplast DNA (cpDNA) and compared it with the sequenced ribosomal RNA spacer region from other cereals. This will allow us to understand chloroplast topology and the recombination ability of cpDNA. The development of potential tools for biotechnology applied to cereals can be focused through the study of cpDNA in family related grasses, such as B. gracilis. cpDNA was prepared from green B. gracilis and Zea mays plants using a modified NaCl method. A 2332 bp intergenic spacer (IGS) region (rrna16S-trnI-trnA-rrna23S) from B. gracilis was sequenced, which showed great similarity (at least 92%) to IGS region from Z. mays, Oryza sativa and Saccharum officinarum. A physical map constructed by Southern hybridization using petA, psbA, psbD, ndhA, rbcL, 16S and 23S rDNA digoxigenin-labelled probes showed low organizational resemblance to maize cpDNA. Moreover, when compared to a similar fragment of Z. mays, a 239 bp intron deletion was found in the trnI gene in the B. gracilis cpDNA. Restriction and hybridization analyses suggested that the B. gracilis cpDNA has a molecular weight of 130 Kb. We expect that the findings reported in this work can be a baseline for increasing our knowledge in chloroplast organization in grasses and for the development of molecular tools.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".