MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Intense proliferation of rDNA sites and heterochromatic bands in two distantly related Cuscuta species (Convolvulaceae) with very large genomes and symmetric karyotypes

2020· article· en· W3034478824 on OpenAlexaff
Amália Ibiapino, Miguel A. Garcı́a, Mihai Costea, Saša Stefanović, Marcelo Guerra

Bibliographic record

VenueGenetics and Molecular Biology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Parasitism and Resistance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyKaryotypePloidyGenome sizeSubgenusHeterochromatinCuscutaGenomeGenusEvolutionary biologyPhylogenetic treePhylogeneticsBotanyZoologyGeneticsChromosomeGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The genome size varies widely among angiosperms but only a few clades present huge variation at a low phylogenetic level. Among diploid species of the genus Cuscuta the genome size increased enormously in at least two independent lineages: in species of subgenus Monogynella and in at least one species (C. indecora) of the subgenus Grammica. Curiously, the independent events lead to similar karyotypes, with 2n = 30 mostly metacentric chromosomes. In this paper we compared the patterns of heterochromatic bands and rDNA sites of C. indecora and C. monogyna, aiming to evaluate the role of these repetitive fractions in these karyotypes. We found out that the large genomes of these species were incremented by a huge number of small heterochromatic CMA+ and DAPI+ bands and 5S and 35 rDNA sites, most of them clearly colocalized with CMA+ bands. Silver nitrate impregnation revealed that the maximum number of nucleoli per nucleus was low in both species, suggesting that some of these sites may be inactive. Noteworthy, the tandem repeats did not generate large bands or sites but rather dozens of small blocks dispersed throughout the chromosomes, apparently contributing to conserve the original karyotype symmetry.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.627
Threshold uncertainty score0.172

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.205 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenetics and Molecular BiologySame topicPlant Parasitism and ResistanceFrench-language works237,207