The impact of sequence divergence and DNA mismatch repair on homeologous recombination in Arabidopsis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined the effects of substrate divergence and DNA mismatch repair (MMR) on recombination in Arabidopsis thaliana. Relative to the frequency observed in plants with a homologous construct (0% divergence), recombination was decreased 4.1-, 9.6-, 11.7- or 20.3-fold, respectively, in lines with constructs containing 0.5%, 2%, 4% or 9% divergence between the recombination substrates. To evaluate the contribution of the MMR system in this decrease, 12 independent reporter lines (two or three lines per reporter construct) were crossed to an AtMSH2 T-DNA insertional mutant. We examined the recombination frequency in progeny homozygous for a reporter T-DNA and homozygous either for the wild type or the mutant allele of AtMSH2. The loss of MMR activity led to a two- to ninefold increase in homeologous recombination and the size of the increase did not seem to correlate with the amount of divergence. Inversely, complementation of the insertional mutant with a wild-type cDNA of AtMSH2 reduced recombination. Our results demonstrate clearly that sequence divergence can dramatically reduce the recombination frequency in plants and that the MMR system plays a part in this decrease.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".