Karyotyping in Melon (Cucumis melo L.) by Cross-Species Fosmid Fluorescence in situ Hybridization
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chromosome identification is critical for cytogenetic research and will accelerate studies on genetic variation and breeding, especially for those species with relatively little sequence information. So far, no reliable cytological landmarks have been developed to distinguish individual chromosomes in melon. In this study, using FISH (fluorescence in situ hybridization) combined with comparative genome information, we selected 21 cucumber fosmids anchored by SSR markers as chromosome-specific cytological markers for melon chromosomes. Moreover, with the help of melon centromeric satellite DNA repeats CentM, 45S rDNA and 5S rDNA, sequential FISH with 3 sets of multi-fosmid cocktails were conducted on the same metaphase cell, which allowed us to simultaneously identify each of the 12 metaphase chromosomes of melon and a standardized melon karyotype of somatic metaphase chromosomes was constructed. Finally, we compared the distribution of 21 FISH-mapped fosmids between melon and cucumber chromosomes, which allows a better understanding of the evolutionary process shaping these 2 species. Our study provides a basis for cytological characterization of the melon genome and comparative genomics of Cucurbitaceae.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it