MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010365366 · doi:10.1139/g01-009

New evidence for the synteny of rice chromosome 1 and barley chromosome 3H from rice expressed sequence tags

2001· article· en· W2010365366 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
W. Diederik Smilde, Jana Haluškova, Takuji Sasaki, Andreas Graner

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Disease Resistance and Genetics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSyntenyBiologyChromosomeGeneticsSequence (biology)GeneBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To provide improved access to the wealth of resources and genomic information that is presently being developed for rice a set of 88 rice expressed sequence tags (ESTs) previously mapped on rice chromosome I in the cross 'Nipponbare' x 'Kasalath' was used for comparative mapping in a cross of the barley cultivars 'Igri' and 'Franka'. As expected. most (89%) of the clones gave distinct banding patterns in barley of which about one-third was polymorphic between 'Igri' and 'Franka'. These polymorphisms were mapped, and most of these (56%) confirmed that rice chromosome 1 and barley chromosome 3H are syntenous. All single-copy markers identified conserved collinear positions, while markers with multiple copies did so in a few cases only. The markers that were not fitting in the collinear order were distributed randomly across the barley genome. The comparative maps of barley chromosome 3H and rice chromosome 1 comprise in total 26 common markers covering more than 95% of the genetic length of both chromosomes. A 30-fold reduction of recombination is seen around the barley centromere, and synteny may be interrupted in this region. However, the good overall synteny on a mesoscale (1-10 cM) justifies the use of rice as a platform for map-based cloning in barley.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score0.238

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations50
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicPlant Disease Resistance and GeneticsFrench-language works237,207