MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108855998 · doi:10.1139/g05-103

Chromosome elimination in germ line – soma differentiation of<i>Acricotopus lucidus</i>(Diptera, Chironomidae)

2006· article· en· W2108855998 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wolfgang Staiber

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicChromosomal and Genetic Variations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologySomatic cellMitosisCell biologyGeneticsGermlineKaryotypeMicrochromosomeChromosome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During germ line-soma differentiation in early syncytial embryonic development of the chironomid Acricotopus lucidus, a complement of supernumerary chromosomes, the so-called germ line limited chromosomes (Ks), is excluded from the future somatic nuclei in the course of elimination mitoses. The Ks lag behind in the equatorial plane, while the somatic chromosomes (Ss) segregate equally. After elimination mitoses, the Ks are only present in the pole cells, the primary germ cells. In the divisions before their elimination, the Ks frequently showed delayed separation of sister chromatids with high-frequency formation of anaphasic bridges and lagging in pole movement as detected in 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI)-stained squash preparations of early embryos. To determine if all of the Ks are eliminated in one step during a single mitosis, a fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) analysis of early embryonic divisions was performed using probes of germ line specific repetitive DNA sequences, which specifically label the Ks in their centromeric regions. In most cases, all of the Ks are lost in one mitosis; however, occasionally one or several of the Ks can escape their elimination by segregating and moving poleward together with the Ss. The escaping Ks will then be eliminated in one of the following mitoses. This clearly indicates that the specific conditions to eliminate Ks are not restricted to only one division. Possible mechanisms of elimination of Ks are discussed.

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 score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score0.513

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations21
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicChromosomal and Genetic VariationsFrench-language works237,207