Genomic in situ hybridization (GISH) discriminates between the A and the B genomes in diploid and tetraploid <i>Setaria</i> species
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genomic in situ hybridization (GISH) was used to investigate genomic relationships between different Setaria species of the foxtail millet gene pool (S. italica) and one interspecific F 1 hybrid. The GISH patterns obtained on the two diploid species S. viridis (genome A) and S. adhaerans (genome B), and on their F 1 hybrid showed clear differentiation between these two genomes except at the nucleolar organizing regions. Similar GISH patterns allowed differentiation of S. italica from S. adhaerans. However, GISH patterns did not distinguish between the genomes of S. italica and its putative wild ancestor S. viridis. GISH was also applied to polyploid Setaria species and enabled confirmation of the assumed allotetraploid nature of S. faberii and demonstration that both S. verticillata and S. verticillata var. ambigua were also allotetraploids. All these tetraploid species contained two sets of 18 chromosomes each, one from genome A and the other from genome B. Only one polyploid species, S. pumila, was shown to bear an unknown genomic composition that is not closely related either to genome A or to genome B.Key words: Setaria, genomic in situ hybridization, genome analysis.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it