Frequency, Origins, and Evolutionary Role of Chromosomal Inversions in Plants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chromosomal inversions have the potential to play an important role in evolution by reducing recombination between favorable combinations of alleles. Until recently, however, most evidence for their likely importance derived from dipteran flies, whose giant larval salivary chromosomes aided early cytogenetic studies. The widespread application of new genomic technologies has revealed that inversions are ubiquitous across much of the plant and animal kingdoms. Here we review the rapidly accumulating literature on inversions in the plant kingdom and discuss what we have learned about their establishment and likely evolutionary role. We show that inversions are prevalent across a wide range of plant groups. We find that inversions are often associated with locally favored traits, as well as with traits that contribute to assortative mating, suggesting that they may be key to adaptation and speciation in the face of gene flow. We also discuss the role of inversions in sex chromosome formation, and explore possible parallels with inversion establishment on autosomes. The identification of inversion origins, as well as the causal variants within them, will advance our understanding of chromosomal evolution in plants.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".