Genomic in situ hybridization (GISH) reveals high chromosome pairing affinity between <i>Lolium perenne</i> and <i>Festuca mairei</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intergeneric hybridizations have been made between species of Lolium and Festuca. It has been demonstrated, largely through conventional cytogenetic analysis, that the genomes of the two genera are related, however, much information is lacking on exactly how closely related the genomes are between the two species. We applied genomic in situ hybridization (GISH) techniques to the F1 hybrids of tetraploid Festuca mairei with a genomic constitution of M1M1M2M2 and diploid Lolium perenne with a genomic constitution of LL. It was shown in the triploid hybrids (LM1M2) that the chromosomes of M1 and M2 from F. mairei could pair with each other, and it was further discovered that L chromosomes of L. perenne paired with M1 and M2 chromosomes. Our results showed that meiocytes of Lolium-Festuca are amenable to GISH analysis, and provided direct evidence for the hypothesis that the chromosomes of Lolium and Festuca may be genetically equivalent and that reciprocal mixing of the genomes may be possible. Key words: Lolium, Festuca, in situ hybridization, meiosis.
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".