Dynamics of 5S rDNA in the tilapia <i>(Oreochromis niloticus)</i> genome: repeat units, inverted sequences, pseudogenes and chromosome loci
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In higher eukaryotes, the 5S ribosomal DNA (5S rDNA) is organized in tandem arrays with repeat units composed of a coding region and a non-transcribed spacer sequence (NTS). These tandem arrays can be found on either one or more chromosome pairs. 5S rDNA copies from the tilapia fish, Oreochromis niloticus, were cloned and the nucleotide sequences of the coding region and of the non-transcribed spacer were determined. Moreover, the genomic organization of the 5S rDNA tandem repeats was investigated by fluorescence IN SITU hybridization (FISH) and Southern blot hybridization. Two 5S rDNA classes, one consisting of 1.4-kb repeats and another one with 0.5-kb repeats were identified and designated 5S rDNA type I and type II, respectively. An inverted 5S rRNA gene and a 5S rRNA putative pseudogene were also identified inside the tandem repeats of 5S rDNA type I. FISH permitted the visualization of the 5S rRNA genes at three chromosome loci, one of them consisting of arrays of the 5S rDNA type I, and the two others corresponding to arrays of the 5S rDNA type II. The two classes of the 5S rDNA, the presence of pseudogenes, and the inverted genes observed in the O. niloticus genome might be a consequence of the intense dynamics of the evolution of these tandem repeat elements.
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) | 0.001 | 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".