Molecular diversity of the 5S nuclear ribosomal DNA in<i>Campeiostachys</i>with<b>StHY</b>haplome constitution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract To detect the genomic constitutions and investigate the evolutionary relationships betweenCampeiostachysDrobov andElymusL. species, we have cloned and analyzed 271 5S nuclear ribosomal DNA sequences from 27 accessions of these species, mostly of Chinese origin. We identified LongH1, ShortS1, and LongY1 unit classes in nineCampeiostachysorElymusspecies. The identification of the three orthologous unit classes was confirmed by the neighbor‐joining tree of each unit class from PAUP and the phylogeny tree of three unit classes from MrBayes. The results suggested that theseElymusspecies compriseStYHhaplomes and should be included inCampeiostachys. The phylogeny tree showed a clear separation between theS1 unit class andY1 unit class. However,Y1 unit class sequences formed a sister clade to theS1 unit class, implying that although theStandYhaplomes might have some affinity, they are distinct from one another. The phylogeny tree also indicated that the five species in sect.Turczaninovia(C. dahuricavar.cylindrica,C. dahuricavar.dahurica,C. dahuricavar.tangutorum,E. purpuraristatus, andE. dahuricusTurcz. ex Griseb. var.violeusC. P. Wang & H. L. Yang) might share a more recent common ancestor, whereas the four species in sect.Elymus(C. nutans,E. breviaristatus(Keng) Keng ex Keng f.,E. sinosubmuticus(Keng) Keng f., andE. atratus(Nevski) Hand.‐Mazz.) share a close relationship. By identifying only one type of unit class for each haplome, we propose that the 5S nuclear ribosomal DNA sequences of species withinCampeiostachysmight have undergone haplome‐specific concerted evolution.
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) | 0.001 | 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".