MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070384472 · doi:10.1139/g00-007

Cloning and characterization of an extremely conserved satellite DNA family from the root-knot nematode <i>Meloidogyne arenaria</i>

2000· article· en· W2070384472 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Philippe Castagnone‐Sereno, Frédéric Leroy, Pierre Abad

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicNematode management and characterization studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyGeneticsGenomeSatellite DNARepeated sequenceSequence analysisDNAGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new satellite DNA family, named pMaE, has been cloned from the genome of the phytoparasitic nematode, Meloidogyne arenaria (Nematoda: Tylenchida). It is represented as tandemly repeated sequences with a monomeric unit of 172 bp. The monomers are present at approximately 15700 copies per haploid genome, and represent about 5.3% of the total genomic DNA. Twenty-seven independent monomers have been cloned and sequenced. The deduced consensus sequence is 70.9% A + T rich, with frequent stretches of A and (or) T. Several direct or inverted sub-repeats are present in the sequence, which may allow the formation of a dyad structure, suggesting some potential role of this repetitive sequence in heterochromatin condensation. The monomers are very homogeneous in sequence, showing on average 1.8% divergence from their consensus sequence. Moreover, Southern blot experiments and sequence analysis of homologous monomers from the genome of geographically distinct M. arenaria populations have shown that this satellite DNA is uniformly distributed and highly conserved within the species. Therefore, it is hypothesized that this unusually low level of variability, either within the genome of a given population or between populations, could be achieved as the result of some highly effective homogenization mechanism acting upon the nematode genome.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.172 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicNematode management and characterization studiesFrench-language works237,207