Karyotypic Evolution of the Common and Silverleaf Sunflower Genomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Silverleaf sunflower ( Helianthus argophyllus Torrey and Gray) has been an important source of favorable alleles for broadening genetic diversity and enhancing agriculturally important traits in common sunflower ( H. annuus L.), and, as the closest living relative of H. annuus , provides an excellent model for understanding how apparently maladaptive chromosomal rearrangements became established in this genus. The genomes of H. annuus and H. argophyllus were comparatively mapped to identify syntenic and rearranged chromosomes and develop genomic blueprints for predicting the impact of chromosomal rearrangements on interspecific gene flow. Syntenic chromosomal segments were identified and aligned using 131 orthologous DNA marker loci distributed throughout the H. annuus genome (299 DNA marker loci were mapped in H. argophyllus ). We identified 28 colinear chromosomal segments, 10 colinear chromosomes, and seven chromosomal rearrangements (five non‐reciprocal translocations and two inversions). Four H. argophyllus chromosomes carrying non‐reciprocal translocations apparently arose from the duplication of two chromosomes, and three H. argophyllus chromosomes apparently arose from end‐to‐end or end‐to‐opposite‐end fusions of chromosomes or chromosome segments. Chromosome duplication may reduce the initial fitness costs of chromosomal rearrangements, thereby facilitating their establishment. Despite dramatic differences in chromosome architecture, a significant fraction of the H. argophyllus genome appears to be accessible for introgression into H. annuus .
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".