Comparative linkage map of the<i>Solanum lycopersicoides</i>and<i>S. sitiens</i>genomes and their differentiation from tomato
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The wild nightshades Solanum lycopersicoides and Solanum sitiens are closely affiliated with the tomatoes (Lycopersicon spp.). Intergeneric hybridization with cultivated tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) is impeded by strong reproductive barriers including hybrid sterility and suppressed recombination. Conservation of genome structure between these nightshades and tomato was studied by construction of a genetic map from F2 S. sitiens x S. lycopersicoides and comparison with existing maps of tomato. Owing to self-incompatibility of the F1, two hybrid plants were crossed to obtain a population of 82 F2 individuals. Using 166 previously mapped RFLP markers and 5 restriction enzymes, 101 loci polymorphic in the S. sitiens x S. lycopersicoides population were identified. Analysis of linkage between the markers resulted in a map with 12 linkage groups covering 1192 cM and one unlinked marker. Recombination rates were similar to those observed in tomato; however, significant segregation distortion was observed for markers on 7 out of the 12 chromosomes. All chromosomes were colinear with the tomato map, except for chromosome 10, where a paracentric inversion on the long arm was detected. In this region, S. sitiens and S. lycopersicoides share the same chromosomal configuration previously reported for potato (S. tuberosum) and pepper (Capsicum), suggesting that of tomato is derived. The 10L inversion explains the lack of recombination detected among homeologous chromosomes of intergeneric hybrids in this region. On this basis, we recognize two principle genomes, designated L for the Lycopersicon spp., and S for S. lycopersicoides and S. sitiens, the first examples of structural differentiation between tomato and its cross-compatible wild relatives.
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".