MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154694895 · doi:10.1139/g09-077

Ribosomal DNA, heterochromatin, and correlation with genome size in diploid and polyploid North American endemic sagebrushes (<i>Artemisia,</i>Asteraceae)

2009· article· en· W2154694895 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sònia Garcia, Teresa Garnatje, Jaume Pellicer, E. Durant McArthur, Sonja Šiljak-Yakovlev, Joan Vallès

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicChromosomal and Genetic Variations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConsejo Superior de Investigaciones CientíficasUniversité de Paris
KeywordsBiologyPolyploidPloidyHeterochromatinGeneticsGenome sizeGenomeRibosomal DNARibosomal RNAAsteraceaeEvolutionary biologyBotanyChromosomePhylogeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Subgenus Tridentatae (Artemisia, Asteraceae) can be considered a polyploid complex. Both polyploidy and hybridization have been documented in the Tridentatae. Fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) and fluorochrome banding were used to detect and analyze ribosomal DNA changes linked to polyploidization in this group by studying four diploid-polyploid species pairs. In addition, genome sizes and heterochromatin patterns were compared between these populations. The linked 5S and 35S rRNA genes are confirmed as characteristic for Artemisia, and a pattern at the diploid level of three rDNA loci located at telomeric positions proved to be typical. Loss of rDNA loci was observed in some polyploids, whereas others showed additivity with respect to their diploid relatives. Genome downsizing was observed in all polyploids. Banding patterns differed depending on the pair of species analysed, but some polyploid populations showed an increased number of heterochromatic bands. FISH and fluorochrome banding were useful in determining the systematic position of Artemisia bigelovii, for which a differential pattern was found as compared with the rest of the group. Additionally, FISH was used to detect the presence of the Arabidopsis-type telomere repeat for the first time in Artemisia.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.857
Threshold uncertainty score0.341

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations39
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicChromosomal and Genetic VariationsFrench-language works237,207