Sister Chromatid Exchange Assessment by Chromosome Orientation-Fluorescence in situ Hybridization on the Bovine Sex Chromosomes and Autosomes 16 and 26
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mammalian genome replication and maintenance are intimately coupled with the mechanisms that ensure cohesion between the resultant sister chromatids and the repair of DNA breaks. Although a sister chromatid exchange (SCE) is an error-free swapping of precisely matched and identical DNA strands, repetitive elements adjacent to the break site can act as alternative template sites and an unequal sister chromatid exchange can result, leading to structural variations and copy number change. Here we test the vulnerability for SCEs of the repeat-rich bovine Y chromosome in comparison with X, 16 and 26 chromosomes, using chromosome orientation-fluorescence in situ hybridization. The mean SCE rate of the Y chromosome (0.065 ± 0.029) was similar to that of BTA16 and BTA26 (0.065, 0.055), but was only approximately half of that of the X chromosome (0.142). As the chromosomal length affects the number of SCE events, we adjusted the SCE rates of the Y, 16, and 26 chromosomes to the length of the largest chromosome X resulting in very similar adjusted SCE (SCE(adj)) rates in all categories. Our results - based on 3 independent bulls - show that, although the cattle Y chromosome is a chest full of repeated elements, their presence and the documented activity of repeats in SCE formation does not manifest in significantly higher SCE(adj) rates and suggest the importance of the structural organization of the Y chromosome and the role of alternative mitotic DNA repair mechanisms.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".