Distribution of FISH oligo-5S rDNA and oligo-(AGGGTTT)<sub>3</sub> in <i>Hibiscus mutabilis</i> L.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hibiscus exhibits high variation in chromosome number both within and among species. The Hibiscus mutabilis L. karyotype was analyzed in detail using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) with oligonucleotide probes for (AG3T3)3 and 5S rDNA, which were tested here for the first time. In total, 90 chromosomes were counted in prometaphase and metaphase, and all exhibited similarly intense (AG3T3)3 signals at both ends. (AG3T3)3 showed little variation and thus did not allow discrimination among H. mutabilis chromosomes, but its location at both ends confirmed the integrity of each chromosome, thus contributing to accurate counting of the numerous, small chromosomes. Oligo-5S rDNA marked the proximal/distal regions of six chromosomes: weak signals on chromosomes 7 and 8, slightly stronger signals on chromosomes 15 and 16, and very strong signals on chromosomes 17 and 18. Therefore, 5S rDNA could assist in chromosome identification in H. mutabilis. Metaphase chromosome lengths ranged from 3.00 to 1.18 μm, indicating small chromosomes. The ratios of longest to shortest chromosome length in prometaphase and metaphase were 2.58 and 2.54, respectively, indicating karyotype asymmetry in H. mutabilis. These results provide an exact chromosome number and a physical map, which will be useful for genome assembly and contribute to molecular cytogenetics in the genus Hibiscus.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".