The genetic identity of alien chromosomes in potato breeding lines revealed by sequential GISH and FISH analyses using chromosome-specific cytogenetic DNA markers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genomic in situ hybridization (GISH) is one of the most popular and effective techniques for detecting alien chromatin introgressed into breeding lines; however, GISH analysis alone does not reveal the genetic identity of the alien chromosomes. We previously isolated a set of bacterial artificial chromosomes (BACs) specific to each of the 12 potato chromosomes. These BAC clones can be used as chromosome-specific cytogenetic DNA markers (CSCDMs) for potato chromosome identification. Here we demonstrate that GISH and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), using CSCDMs, can be performed sequentially on the same chromosome preparations. Somatic metaphase chromosomes prepared using an enzymatic digestion and "flame-drying" procedure allows repeated probing up to five times without significant damage to chromosome morphology. The sequential GISH and FISH analyses reveal the genomic origin and genetic identity of the alien chromosomes in a single experiment and also determine whether an alien chromosome has been added to the genetic background of potato or is substituting for a homoeologous potato chromosome. The sequential GISH and FISH procedures should be widely applicable for germplasm characterization, especially in plant species with small-sized chromosomes.
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".