Identification and comparison of individual chromosomes of three accessions of <i>Hordeum chilense</i> , <i>Hordeum vulgare</i> , and <i>Triticum aestivum</i> by FISH
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Karyotypes of three accessions of Hordeum chilense (H1, H16, and H7), Hordeum vulgare, and Triticum aestivum were characterized by physical mapping of several repetitive sequences. A total of 14 repetitive sequences were used as probes for fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) with the aim of identifying inter- and intraspecies polymorphisms. The (AG) 12 and 4P6 probes only produced hybridization signals in wheat, the BAC7 probe only hybridized to the centromeric region of H. vulgare, and the pSc119.2 probe hybridized to both wheat and H. chilense, but not to H. vulgare. The remaining repetitive sequences used in this study produced a hybridization signal in all the genotypes. Probes pAs1, pTa-535, pTa71, CCS1, and CRW were much conserved, showing no significant polymorphism among the genotypes studied. Probes GAA, (AAC) 5 , (CTA) 5 , HvT01, and pTa794 produced the most different hybridization pattern. We identified large polymorphisms in the three accessions of H. chilense studied, supporting the proposal of the existence of different groups inside species of H. chilense. The set of probes described in this work allowed the identification of every single chromosome in all three species, providing a complete cytogenetic karyotype of H. chilense, H. vulgare, and T. aestivum chromosomes, which could be useful in wheat and tritordeum breeding programs.
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".