Genome evolution during bread wheat formation unveiled by the distribution dynamics of SSR sequences on chromosomes using FISH
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: During the bread wheat speciation by polyploidization, a series of genome rearrangement and sequence recombination occurred. Simple sequence repeat (SSR) sequences, predominately located in heterochromatic regions of chromosomes, are the effective marker for tracing the genomic DNA sequence variations. However, to date the distribution dynamics of SSRs on chromosomes of bread wheat and its donors, including diploid and tetraploid Triticum urartu, Aegilops speltoides, Aegilops tauschii, Triticum turgidum ssp. dicocoides, reflecting the genome evolution events during bread wheat formation had not been comprehensively investigated. RESULTS: in bread wheat Triticum aestivum var. Chinese Spring and its progenitors T. urartu, A. speltoides, Ae. tauschii, wild tetroploid emmer wheat T. dicocoides, and cultivated emmer wheat T. dicoccum. Results indicated that there are specific distribution patterns in different chromosomes from different species for each SSRs. They provided efficient visible markers for identification of some individual chromosomes and SSR sequence evolution tracing from the diploid progenitors to hexaploid wheat. During wheat speciation, the SSR sequence expansion occurred predominately in the centromeric and pericentromeric regions of B genome chromosomes accompanied by little expansion and elimination on other chromosomes. This result indicated that the B genome might be more sensitive to the "genome shock" and more changeable during wheat polyplodization. CONCLUSIONS: in B genome displayed the greatest changes (sequence expansion) especially in centromeric and pericentromeric regions during the polyploidization from Ae. speltoides S genome, the most likely donor of B genome. This work would enable a better understanding of the wheat genome formation and evolution and reinforce the viewpoint that B genome was originated from S genome.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".