Quantitative evolution of transposable and satellite DNA sequences in <i>Picea</i> species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clones containing tandemly arranged repeats belonging to two distinct sequence families, (i) PAG004P22F (2F) and PAG004E03C (3C) or (ii) Ty3/gypsy- (8R; PAG004B08R) and Ty1/copia-like sequences (9R; PAG007F19R), were selected from a randomly sheared total genomic DNA library of Picea abies . The inserts were used as probes in dot-blot hybridizations to genomic DNA of P. abies, Picea orientalis , Picea pungens , and Picea pungens var. glauca. All these entities are diploid and share the same chromosome number (2n = 24), but the genome sizes differ largely. The redundancy (copy number per 1C DNA) of sequences related to each probe varied greatly between the genomes. No significant correlation was found between the genome size and the copy number of sequences in any family. The quantitative ratios varied greatly (in each genome) between the two families of satellite DNA, between the sequences that represented copia or gypsy retrotransposons, and between tandemly arranged sequences and retroelements as a whole, suggesting that there is no common factor that controls the quantitative evolution of repeats belonging to different sequence families during speciation in Picea.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".