Karyotype Analysis of Diploid Oat Germplasm Introduced from Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The chromosome karyotype of three diploid oat species was studied with squash method. The results showed that the karyotype formula of Avena strigosa was 2n=2x=14=10m+4sm(2SAT), with metacentric and submetacentric chromosomes,1 pair of satellites on the short arm of the 4th chromosome and 68.17% for the asymmetry index; that of Avena hispanica, was 2n=2x=14=10m+4sm(2SAT), with metacentric and submetacentric chromosomes, 1 pair of satellites on the short arm of the 7th chromosome and 59.31% for the asymmetry index ;and that of Avena brevis was 2n=2x=14=6m+4sm+4st(2SAT), with acrocentric,metacentric and submetacentric chromosomes, 1 pair of satellites on the short arm of the 6th chromosome and 63.91% for the asymmetry index . Although the karyotypes of all three species were 2A type, there was obvious variation in the morphologies of karyotypes of three species, which comparatively indicated that the karyotype of Avena strigosa was more advanced in evolution, followed by Avena brevis and the karyotype of Avena hispanica was more original. This study will be a useful reference for the karyotype analysis and evolutionary analysis of oat germplasm resources.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".