Contrasting genome organisation: two regions of the<i>Brassica oleracea</i>genome compared with collinear regions of the<i>Arabidopsis</i><i>thaliana</i>genome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brassica crop species are of worldwide importance and are closely related to the model plant Arabidopsis thaliana for which the complete genome sequence has recently been established. We investigated collinearity of marker order by comparing two contrasting regions of the Brassica oleracea genome with homologous regions of A. thaliana. Although there is widespread replication of marker loci in both A. thaliana and B. oleracea, we found that a combination of genetic markers mapped in B. oleracea, including RFLPs, CAPS, and SSRs allowed comparison and interpretation of medium-scale chromosomal organisation and rearrangements. The interpretation of data was facilitated by hybridising probes onto the whole A. thaliana genome, as represented by BAC contigs. Twenty marker loci were sampled from the whole length of the shortest B. oleracea linkage group, 06, and 21 from a 30.4-cM section of the longest linkage group, 03. There is evidence of locus duplication on linkage group 06. Locus order is well conserved between a putative duplicated region of 10.5 cM and a discrete region comprising 25 cM of A. thaliana chromosome I. This was supported by evidence from seven paralogous loci, three of which were duplicated in a 30.6-cM region of linkage group 06. The pattern of locus order for the remainder of linkage group 06 and the sampled section of linkage group 03 was more complex when compared with the A. thaliana genome. Although there was some conservation of locus order between markers on linkage group 03 and approximately 9 cM of A. thaliana chromosome I, this was superimposed upon a complex pattern of additional loci that were replicated in both A. thaliana and B. oleracea. The results are discussed in the context of the ability to use collinear information to assist map-based cloning.
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) | 0.001 | 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".