Characterization of a tandemly repeated subtelomeric sequence with inverted telomere repeats in maize
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, two complementary telomere primers were applied to a single-primer PCR. A clear amplification band was obtained with one primer, while a smear pattern was seen with the other primer. Sequence analysis of the isolated clones from this specific amplification band revealed that a 412 bp clone designated as MTAS1 shared high homology with a reported subtelomeric sequence (382 bp) from maize (Zea mays L.), which indicated that this clone was possibly present at subtelomeric regions. The clone MTAS1 displayed a novel structural feature flanked by the forward and inverted telomere repeats. Southern hybridization revealed a ladder of hybridization bands, suggesting that MTAS1 was a tandemly repeated sequence. Fluorescence in situ hybridization results showed that the strong MTAS1 signals were present at the ends of short arms of several long chromosomes, confirming that MTAS1 was a subtelomeric sequence and the high brightness of signals further indicated this cloned sequence was a highly and tandemly repetitive sequence in maize. Fluorescence in situ hybridization with telomeric DNA and MTAS1 as probes on metaphase chromosomes and extended genomic DNA fibers showed that hybridization signals of this clone located adjacent to or overlapped with signals of telomere tandem repeats distributed heterogeneously in subtelomeric regions of several chromosomes and even exhibited differences in two subtelomeres of a single chromosome.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
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".