Molecular cytogenetic analysis of wheatbarley hybrids using genomic in situ hybridization and barley microsatellite markers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the present investigation, genomic in situ hybridization (GISH) and barley microsatellite markers were used to analyse the genome constitution of wheat-barley hybrids from two backcross generations (BC1 and BC2). Two BC1 plants carried 3 and 6 barley chromosomes, respectively, according to GISH data. Additional chromosomal fragments were detected using microsatellites. Five BC2 plants possessed complete barley chromosomes or chromosome segments and six BC2 plants did not preserve barley genetic material. Molecular markers revealed segments of the barley genome with the size of one marker only, which probably resulted from recombination between wheat and barley chromosomes. The screening of backcrossed populations from intergeneric hybrids could be effectively conducted using both genomic in situ hybridization and molecular microsatellite markers. GISH images presented a general overview of the genome constitution of the hybrid plants, while microsatellite analysis revealed the genetic identity of the alien chromosomes and chromosomal segments introgressed. These methods were complementary and provided comprehensive information about the genomic constitution of the plants produced.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".