Alterations in subtelomeric tandem repeats during early stages of allopolyploidy in wheat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The genomic content of the subtelomeric repeated sequences Spelt1 and Spelt52 was studied by dot, Southern, and in situ hybridization in 11 newly synthesized amphiploids of Aegilops and Triticum, and data were compared with the parental plants. Spelt1 had reduced copy numbers in the first generation of three synthetic amphiploids, but two others did not change; Spelt52 was amplified in nine amphiploids and did not change in two. In the second allopolyploid generation, Spelt1 copy number did not change, whereas there was amplification of Spelt52 in some allopolyploids and decreases in others. Neither allopolyploidy level nor the direction of the cross affected the patterns of change in the newly synthesized amphiploids. Changes did not result from intergenomic recombination because similar alterations were noticed in allopolyploids with and without Ph1, a gene that suppresses homoeologous pairing. No differences in Spelt1 and Spelt52 tandem organization were found by Southern hybridization. The significance of these data are discussed in relation to the establishment of newly formed allopolyploids.
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".