Genome organization of major tandem repeats and their specificity for heterochromatin of macro- and microchromosomes in Japanese quail
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tandemly repeated DNAs form heterochromatic regions of chromosomes, including the vital centromeric chromatin. Despite the progress in new genomic technologies, tandem repeats remain poorly deciphered and need targeted analysis in the species of interest. The Japanese quail is one of the highest-producing poultry species as well as a model organism. Its genome differs by a noticeable accumulation of heterochromatin, which led to an increase by 1/7 compared to the chicken genome size. Prominent heterochromatin blocks occupy the short arms of acrocentric macrochromosomes and of microchromosomes. We have applied de novo repeat finder approach to unassembled raw reads of the Japanese quail genome. We identified the 20 most common tandem repeats with the abundance >1 Mb, which represent about 4.8% of the genome. We found that tandem repeat CjapSAT primarily contributes to the centromeric regions of the macrochromosomes CJA1–8. Cjap31B together with previously characterized BglII makes up centromere regions of microchromosomes and W chromosome. Other repeats populate heterochromatin of microchromosomal short arms in unequal proportions, as revealed by fluorescence in situ hybridization. The Cjap84A, Cjap408A, and CjapSAT repeat sequences show similarities to retrotransposon motifs. This suggests that retroelements may have played a crucial role in the distribution of repeats throughout the Japanese quail 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 | 0.001 | 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".