Genome doubling and chromosome elimination with fragment recombination leading to the formation of <i>Brassica rapa</i>–type plants with genomic alterations in crosses with <i>Orychophragmus violaceus</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In distant hybridization of plants, nonclassical hybrids with unexpected chromosome complements, chromosome elimination, and genetic introgression have been well documented. We obtained intergeneric hybrids between Brassica rapa, B. rapa var. chinensis, and another cruciferous species, Orychophragmus violaceus, following embryo rescue. Hybrids mainly displayed phenotypes of B. rapa, although certain O. violaceus or novel characteristics also appeared. Variable numbers of chromosomes were observed in somatic cells in the roots of plantlets on medium and in ovaries and pollen mother cells (PMCs). However, higher numbers were recorded in the roots. GISH revealed that the majority of ovary cells and PMCs contained 20 chromosomes of B. rapa with or without individual O. violaceus chromosomes or fragments added or introgressed. AFLP analysis showed that fragments deleted from the B. rapa genome were much more frequent than novel and O. violaceus fragments. The mechanisms involved genome doubling and successive elimination of O. violaceus chromosomes accompanied by fragment recombination and introgression, producing B. rapa-type plants with modified genetic constitutions and phenotypes.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".