Comparative gene mapping in <i>Arabidopsis lyrata</i> chromosomes 1 and 2 and the corresponding <i>A. thaliana</i> chromosome 1: recombination rates, rearrangements and centromere location
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To add detail to the genetic map of Arabidopsis lyrata, and compare it with that of A. thaliana, we have developed many additional markers in the A. lyrata linkage groups, LG1 and LG2, corresponding to A. thaliana chromosome 1. We used a newly developed method for marker development for single nucleotide polymorphisms present in gene sequences, plus length differences, to map genes in an A. lyrata family, including variants in several genes close to the A. thaliana centromere 1, providing the first data on the location of an A. lyrata centromere; we discuss the implications for the evolution of chromosome 1 of A. thaliana. With our larger marker density, large rearrangements between the two Arabidopsis species are excluded, except for a large inversion on LG2. This was previously known in Capsella; its presence in A. lyrata suggests that, like most other rearrangements, it probably arose in the A. thaliana lineage. Knowing that marker orders are similar, we can now compare homologous, non-rearranged map distances to test the prediction of more frequent crossing-over in the more inbreeding species. Our results support the previous conclusion of similar distances in the two species for A. lyrata LG1 markers. For LG2 markers, the distances were consistently, but non-significantly, larger in A. lyrata. Given the two species' large DNA content difference, the similarity of map lengths, particularly for LG1, suggests that crossing-over is more frequent across comparable physical distances in the inbreeder, A. thaliana, as predicted.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".