MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154496944 · doi:10.1093/molehr/gah173

Meiotic studies in an azoospermic human translocation (Y;1) carrier

2005· article· en· W2154496944 on OpenAlexaff
Fei Sun, M. Oliver‐Bonet, P.J. Turek, Edmund Ko, Renée H. Martin

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Human Reproduction · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicChromosomal and Genetic Variations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChromosomal translocationBiologyMeiosisMLH1GeneticsSynaptonemal complexChromosomeHomologous recombinationRecombinationMolecular biologyGeneDNA repairDNA mismatch repair

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A reciprocal translocation between the long arm of the Y chromosome and the long arm of chromosome 1 was observed in an infertile man with non-obstructive azoospermia. The study was performed using a combination of techniques: immunocytogenetic analysis, which allows the detection of synaptonemal complexes (SCs) and recombination sites (MLH1) simultaneously, and fluorescence in-situ hybridization analysis. Meiotic pairing analysis on 100 pachytene spreads showed the presence of a quadrivalent containing chromosomes 1 and Y. There were many abnormalities in chromosome pairing and recombination. These abnormalities included a great reduction of recombination events (as many as one fifth of the SCs had no MLH1 foci), and high proportions of unpaired regions and discontinuities in the SCs. We discuss the possibility that infertility in this patient may be due to transcriptional repression of part of chromosome 1 involved in the translocation, silencing some genes necessary for the progression of meiosis and causing defective meiotic pairing and recombination.

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)0.002
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 score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations101
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Human ReproductionSame topicChromosomal and Genetic VariationsFrench-language works237,207