Reference karyotype and cytomolecular map for loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A reference karyotype is presented for loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L., subgenus Pinus, section Pinus, subsection Australes), based on fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH), using 18S-28S rDNA, 5S rDNA, and an Arabidopsis-type telomere repeat sequence (A-type TRS). Well separated somatic chromosomes were prepared from colchicine-treated root meristems, using an enzymatic digestion technique. Statistical analyses performed on chromosome-arm lengths, centromeric indices, and interstitial rDNA and telomeric positions were based on observations from 6 well-separated metaphase cells from each of 3 unrelated trees. Statistically, 7 of the 12 loblolly pine chromosomes could be distinguished by their relative lengths. Centromeric indices were unable to distinguish additional chromosomes. However, the position and relative strength of the rDNA and telomeric sites made it possible to uniquely identify all of the chromosomes, providing a reference karyotype for use in comparative genome analyses. A dichotomous key was developed to aid in the identification of loblolly pine chromosomes and their comparison to chromosomes of other Pinus spp. A cytomolecular map was developed using the interstitial 18S-28S rDNA and A-type TRS signals. A total of 54 bins were assigned, ranging from 3 to 5 bins per chromosome. This is the first report of a chromosome-anchored physical map for a conifer that includes a dichotomous key for accurate and consistent identification of the P. taeda chromosomes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".