MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089521827 · doi:10.1139/g00-085

Physical localization of single-copy sequences on pachytene chromosomes in maize (<i>Zea mays</i>L.) by chromosome in situ suppression hybridization

2000· article· en· W2089521827 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Monther Sadder, Norbert Ponelies, Ute Born, Gerd Weber

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicChromosomal and Genetic Variations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDeutscher Akademischer AustauschdienstCenter for Enabling New Technologies Through Catalysis
KeywordsBiologyFluorescence in situ hybridizationCosmidHybridization probeCentromereLocus (genetics)GeneticsChromosomeDNA–DNA hybridizationRepeated sequenceMolecular biologyIn situ hybridizationHomologous chromosomeGene mappingSatellite DNAChromosome 16DNAGeneGenome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new approach for locating single-copy DNA sequences on pachytene chromosomes of maize (Zea mays L.) was developed. A cosmid clone with homologous sequences to a molecular marker (umc105a) linked to a quantitative trait locus (QTL) for resistance against sugarcane borer (SCB) was physically mapped by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) to the short arm of chromosome 9. The marker umc105a was genetically placed in the centromeric region. To suppress signals generated by maize repetitive DNA, competitive in situ suppression (CISS) hybridization was necessary to obtain specific signals from umc105a. A centromere specific DNA probe (CentC) was used in a double-labeling technique as a reference marker. Fluorescence signals generated by umc105a cosmid and CentC were specific and highly reproducible. Thus the single-copy DNA sequence of umc105a was physically localized on the short arm of chromosome 9 near the telomere. This is the first report of physical localization of single-copy DNA sequence by CISS hybridization to a maize pachytene chromosome.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.346
Threshold uncertainty score0.817

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations35
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicChromosomal and Genetic VariationsFrench-language works237,207