The mosaic of ancestral karyotype blocks in the<i>Sinapis alba</i>L. genome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The organisation of the Sinapis alba genome, comprising 12 linkage groups (n = 12), was compared with the Brassicaceae ancestral karyotype (AK) genomic blocks previously described in other crucifer species. Most of the S. alba genome falls into conserved triplicated genomic blocks that closely match the AK-defined genomic blocks found in other crucifer species including the A, B, and C genomes of closely related Brassica species. In one instance, an S. alba linkage group (S05) was completely collinear with one AK chromosome (AK1), the first time this has been observed in a member of the Brassiceae tribe. However, as observed for other members of the Brassiceae tribe, ancestral genomic blocks were fragmented in the S. alba genome, supporting previously reported comparative chromosome painting describing rearrangements of the AK karyotype prior to the divergence of the Brassiceae from other crucifers. The presented data also refute previous phylogenetic reports that suggest S. alba was more closely related to Brassica nigra (B genome) than to B. rapa (A genome) and B. oleracea (C genome). A comparison of the S. alba and Arabidopsis thaliana genomes revealed many regions of conserved gene order, which will facilitate access to the rich genomic resources available in the model species A. thaliana for genetic research in the less well-resourced crop species S. alba.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
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".