Genome size variation in <i>Arachis hypogaea</i> and <i>A. monticola</i> re-evaluated
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genome size variation within species is a frequently reported, but still a controversial problem. In the present study, we re-evaluated recently published Feulgen densitometric data on genome size and its infraspecific variation in Arachis hypogaea, and also conducted measurements in one accession of its wild relative A. monticola. The methods applied were propidium iodide flow cytometry and Feulgen densitometry using Pisum sativum as an internal standard. The 2C DNA contents previously published cannot be confirmed, but values obtained in this study are about half as large. Additionally, we could not reproduce the previously reported 1.15-fold variation within A. hypogaea; our data indicate genome size stability between respective accessions of this species. Based on 8.84 pg (2C) for Pisum sativum the DNA amounts (2C) were: 5.914 pg in A. hypogaea, and 5.979 pg in A. monticola.
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".