Chromosome identification of <i>Medicago polymorpha</i> by oligonucleotide-based FISH
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Medicago polymorpha (2 n = 2 x = 14) is a valuable forage legume, but the identification of its somatic chromosomes has been challenging due to a lack of distinctive chromosome morphological features. With appropriate probes, oligonucleotide-based FISH is a highly effective method for chromosome identification. However, there are no available probes for M. polymorpha. In this study, we isolated five tandem repeats from the M. polymorpha genome, named Mp51, Mp139, Mp167, Mp179, and Mp497. Mp51 showed two pairs of signals located at the pericentromere. Mp139 exhibited four pairs of signals, located at the pericentromere and short arm of chromosomes. Mp167 and Mp179 showed seven pairs of signals, respectively, concentrated in the pericentromere. Mp497 exhibited three pairs of signals, distributed across the pericentromere and proximal position of the chromosomes. The combined FISH results of Mp51 and Mp139 oligo probes with 5S rDNA and 18S-26S rDNA probes demonstrated distinct signal patterns for each chromosome, enabling the precise identification of all chromosome pairs. Finally, the visual identification of M. polymorpha chromosomes was resolved. This will provide useful cytological information for studying the chromosomal structure and behavior of M. polymorpha.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".