Detection and Effects of a Homeologous Reciprocal Transposition in <i>Brassica napus</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A reciprocal chromosomal transposition was identified in several annual oilseed Brassica napus genotypes used as parents in crosses to biennial genotypes for genetic mapping studies. The transposition involved an exchange of interstitial homeologous regions on linkage groups N7 and N16, and its detection was made possible by the use of segregating populations of doubled haploid lines and codominant RFLP markers. RFLP probes detected pairs of homeologous loci on N7 and N16 for which the annual and biennial parents had identical alleles in regions expected to be homeologous. The existence of an interstitial reciprocal transposition was confirmed by cytological analysis of synaptonemal complexes of annual x biennial F1 hybrids. Although it included approximately one-third of the physical length of the N7 and N16 chromosomes, few recombination events within the region were recovered in the progenies of the hybrids. Significantly higher seed yields were associated with the parental configurations of the rearrangement in segregating progenies. These progenies contained complete complements of homeologous chromosomes from the diploid progenitors of B. napus, and thus their higher seed yields provide evidence for the selective advantage of allopolyploidy through the fixation of intergenomic heterozygosity.
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".