Comparative cytogenetic study on<i>Trifolium subterraneum</i>(2<i>n</i>= 16) and<i>Trifolium israeliticum</i>(2<i>n</i>= 12)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Changes in chromosome number have played an important role in the evolution of the genus Trifolium. Along with a few species of polyploid origin there are several cases of dysploidy as evidenced by the presence of four basic chromosome numbers (x = 8, 7, 6, 5). Trifolium subterraneum and Trifolium israeliticum are related species with chromosome complements 2n = 16 and 2n = 12, respectively. Although they represent an interesting case of speciation based on chromosome number reduction, no attempts to demonstrate their cytogenetic affinity have been carried out to date. With this study we performed a comparative cytogenetic study with the purpose of clarifying the evolutionary relationship between these species and to verify whether genomic rearrangements, other than modification of the chromosome number, are associated with the speciation process. Although karyomorphological analysis supports the hypothesis that chromosome rearrangements had a role in the reduction of the chromosome number, the physical mapping of the rDNA sequences revealed a significant remodelling of the 45S and 5S rDNA sites that greatly contributed to the differentiation of the 2n = 16 and 2n = 12 karyotypes. The nucleotide analysis of 5S rDNA repeats confirmed that the two species are related but constitute distinct entities. The observed genomic changes lead to the hypothesis that the 2n = 12 species is the result of an evolutionary pathway that passed through intermediate forms. It cannot be excluded that the most direct ancestor of T. israeliticum is a species with 2n = 14.
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) | 0.002 | 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".