Bibliographic record
Abstract
Allopolyploidy is a prominent mode of speciation in flowering plants. On allopolyploidy, genomic changes can take place, including chromosomal rearrangement and changes in gene expression; these processes continue over evolutionary time. Recent studies of gene expression in polyploid and hybrid plants, reviewed here, have examined expression in natural polyploids and synthetic neopolyploids as well as in diploid and F(1) hybrids. Considerable changes in gene expression have been observed in allopolyploids, including up- or downregulation of expression in the polyploids compared with their parents, unequal expression of duplicated genes, and silencing of one copy. Genes in a variety of functional categories show altered expression, and the patterns vary considerably by gene. Some changes seem to be stochastic, whereas others are repeatable. Gene expression changes can be organ specific. Reciprocal silencing of duplicates in different organs has been observed, suggesting subfunctionalization and long-term retention of duplicates. It has become clear that hybridization has a much greater effect than chromosome doubling on gene expression in allopolyploids. Diploid and triploid F(1) hybrids can show alterations of expression levels compared with their parents. Parent-of-origin effects on gene expression have been examined, and loss of gene imprinting has been shown. Some gene expression changes in polyploids and hybrids can be correlated with phenotypic effects. Demonstrated mechanisms of gene expression changes include DNA methylation, histone modifications, and antisense RNA. Several hypotheses have been proposed for why gene expression is altered in allopolyploids and hybrids.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".