Genotypic variation in tetraploid wheat affecting homoeologous pairing in hybrids with<i>Aegilops peregrina</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Ph1 gene has long been considered the main factor responsible for the diploid-like meiotic behavior of polyploid wheat. This dominant gene, located on the long arm of chromosome 5B (5BL), suppresses pairing of homoeologous chromosomes in polyploid wheat and in their hybrids with related species. Here we report on the discovery of genotypic variation among tetraploid wheats in the control of homoeologous pairing. Compared with the level of homoeologous pairing in hybrids between Aegilops peregrina and the bread wheat cultivar Chinese Spring (CS), significantly higher levels of homoeologous pairing were obtained in hybrids between Ae. peregrina and CS substitution lines in which chromosome 5B of CS was replaced by either 5B of Triticum turgidum ssp. dicoccoides line 09 (TTD09) or 5G of Triticum timopheevii ssp. timopheevii line 01 (TIM01). Similarly, a higher level of homoeologous pairing was found in the hybrid between Ae. peregrina and a substitution line of CS in which chromosome arm 5BL of line TTD140 substituted for 5BL of CS. It appears that the observed effect on the level of pairing is exerted by chromosome arm 5BL of T. turgidum ssp. dicoccoides, most probably by an allele of Ph1. Searching for variation in the control of homoeologous pairing among lines of wild tetraploid wheat, either T. turgidum ssp. dicoccoides or T. timopheevii ssp. armeniacum, showed that hybrids between Ae. peregrina and lines of these two wild wheats exhibited three different levels of homoeologous pairing: low, low intermediate, and high intermediate. The low-intermediate and high-intermediate genotypes may possess weak alleles of Ph1. The three different T. turgidum ssp. dicoccoides pairing genotypes were collected from different geographical regions in Israel, indicating that this trait may have an adaptive value. The availability of allelic variation at the Ph1 locus may facilitate the mapping, tagging, and eventually the isolation of this important gene.Key words: diploid-like meiotic behavior, genetic control of pairing, Ph1 gene, Triticum turgidum ssp. dicoccoides, wild emmer.
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".