Characterization of an Interstitial Deletion del(13)(q22q32) Using Microdissection and Sequential FISH and G-Banding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to delineate a chromosome 13 abnormality and establish its clinical correlation by using molecular cytogenetics procedures. A newborn boy presented with clinical findings, including mild symmetric intrauterine growth retardation (IUGR), small ears with thickened helices, a scalp lesion, short fifth fingers, missing toes, and talipes equinovarus. Routine G-banding of cultured peripheral blood cells revealed that the patient had one abnormal and shortened chromosome 13, but uncertainty remained as to whether the abnormality was the result of an interstitial deletion or a translocation. Thirteen copies of G-banded abnormal chromosomes 13 were isolated with microdissection and amplified with PCR using degenerate oligonucleotide primers. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) of the PCR product to normal metaphases showed one pair of acrocentrics hybridized, more or less uniformly, along the length of the long arm with an unhybridized gap in the distal region, indicative of an interstitial deletion. Sequential FISH and G-banding of the same chromosome preparations conclusively demonstrated that the deleted segment was 13q22-q32. Four cases of del(13)(q22q32) have been previously reported. The common findings in all five cases, including the present one, are psychomotor and growth retardation, as well as hand and foot anomalies.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".