MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146521797 · doi:10.1534/genetics.105.042093

Segmental Structure of the <i>Brassica napus</i> Genome Based on Comparative Analysis With <i>Arabidopsis thaliana</i>

2005· article· en· W2146521797 on OpenAlexafffund
Isobel A. P. Parkin, Sigrun Gulden, Andrew Sharpe, Lewis Lukens, Martin Trick, T. C. Osborn, Derek J. Lydiate

Bibliographic record

VenueGenetics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicChromosomal and Genetic Variations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsArabidopsisBiologyGenomeGeneticsBrassicaArabidopsis thalianaComparative genomicsPloidyGeneWhole genome sequencingChromosomeGenome evolutionGenomicsBotanyMutant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over 1000 genetically linked RFLP loci in Brassica napus were mapped to homologous positions in the Arabidopsis genome on the basis of sequence similarity. Blocks of genetically linked loci in B. napus frequently corresponded to physically linked markers in Arabidopsis. This comparative analysis allowed the identification of a minimum of 21 conserved genomic units within the Arabidopsis genome, which can be duplicated and rearranged to generate the present-day B. napus genome. The conserved regions extended over lengths as great as 50 cM in the B. napus genetic map, equivalent to approximately 9 Mb of contiguous sequence in the Arabidopsis genome. There was also evidence for conservation of chromosome landmarks, particularly centromeric regions, between the two species. The observed segmental structure of the Brassica genome strongly suggests that the extant Brassica diploid species evolved from a hexaploid ancestor. The comparative map assists in exploiting the Arabidopsis genomic sequence for marker and candidate gene identification within the larger, intractable genomes of the Brassica polyploids.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.196 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations587
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeneticsSame topicChromosomal and Genetic VariationsFrench-language works237,207