Genomic in situ hybridization analysis of a trigenomic hybrid involving<i>Solanum</i>and<i>Lycopersicon</i>species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A 4x potato (+) tomato fusion hybrid (2n = 4x = 48) was successfully backcrossed with a diploid Lycopersicon pennellii (2n = 2x = 24). Genomic in situ hybridization (GISH) on somatic and meiotic chromosomes confirmed that the progenies were triploids (2n = 3x = 36) and possessed three different genomes: potato, tomato, and L. pennellii. Therefore, they have been called trigenomic hybrids. Total genomic probes of both Lycopersicon species were found to hybridize mutually, whereas the potato genome was clearly differentiated. During metaphase I, bivalents were formed predominantly between tomato and L. pennellii chromosomes and the univalents of potato chromosomes were most common. Trivalents in all cases included homoeologous chromosomes of potato, tomato, and L. pennellii. However, the triploids were totally sterile as determined from extensive crossing. On chromosome doubling of triploids by shoot regeneration from callus, hexaploids (2n = 6x = 72) were obtained. Despite exhibiting clear allohexaploid behaviour by forming 36 bivalents at meiosis, these were also completely sterile like their triploid counterparts. In spite of this drawback, the prospects of chromosome pairing between potato L. pennellii and Solanum genomes does open the possibilities for bringing the two genera close.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".