Relationship between pachytene synapsis, metaphase I associations, and transmission of 2B and 4B chromosomes in rye
Bibliographic record
Abstract
2B rye plants selected for high (H) or low (L) B transmission rate were studied at pachytene and metaphase I of meiosis to determine the relationship between synapsis, bivalents at metaphase I, and B transmission rate. The results show that the 2 B chromosomes (Bs) form bivalents at pachytene in both the H and L lines, whereas the frequency of bivalents at metaphase I is much higher in the H than in the L line. This demonstrates that B transmission is mainly related to the proper association of Bs at metaphase I, as well as that synapsis of the 2 Bs in the L line is normal, but the bivalent is not consolidated by a chiasma in most cases. Crosses were made between 2B plants of the H and L lines in all combinations (H x H, H x L, L x H, and L x L) to obtain 4B plants. Similarly, bivalent formation at pachytene and metaphase I was studied. The results show that 4B plants of the H x H and L x L classes differ significantly at pachytene and metaphase I since the former forms more bivalents. The heterozygous 4 Bs of the H x L and L x H classes show intermediate values. The relation H x H > H x L > L x H > L x L was consistently found for the variables transmission rate, bivalents at pachytene, bivalents at metaphase I, and B mean chiasma frequency. A maternal effect was also found. Our data suggest that there are two separate mechanisms acting upon synapsis and chiasma formation in H and L B chromosomes: (i) there is variable efficiency of the control of synapsis at early stages of meiosis; and (ii) there is variable efficiency of the control of the number of chiasmata.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".