Rejection of S-Heteroallelic Pollen by a Dual-Specific S-RNase in <i>Solanum chacoense</i> Predicts a Multimeric SI Pollen Component
Bibliographic record
Abstract
S-heteroallelic pollen (HAP) grains are usually diploid and contain two different S-alleles. Curiously, HAP produced by tetraploids derived from self-incompatible diploids are typically self-compatible. The two different hypotheses previously advanced to explain the compatibility of HAP are the lack of pollen-S expression and the "competition effect" between two pollen-S gene products expressed in a single pollen grain. To distinguish between these two possibilities, we used a previously described dual-specific S(11/13)-RNase, termed HVapb-RNase, which can reject two phenotypically distinct pollen (P(11) and P(13)). Since the HVapb-RNase does not distinguish between the two pollen types (it recognizes both), P(11)P(13) HAP should be incompatible with the HVapb-RNase in spite of the competition effect. We show here that P(11)P(13) HAP is accepted by S(11)S(13) styles, but is rejected by the S(11/13)-RNase, which demonstrates that the pollen-S genes must be expressed in HAP. A model involving tetrameric pollen-S is proposed to explain both the compatibility of P(11)P(13) HAP on S(11)S(13)-containing styles and the incompatibility of P(11)P(13) HAP on styles containing the HVapb-RNase.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".