Maternal Inheritance of Chloroplast DNA in Interspecific Crosses of Bromus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inheritance of chloroplast DNA (cpDNA) was examined in 41 F1 progeny obtained from the following interspecific Bromus crosses: Bromus arvensis (2n = 14) × B. inermis (2n = 4x = 28); B. arvensis × B. inermis (2n = 8x = 56); B. arvensis × B. erectus (2n = 6x = 42); B. arvensis × B. erectus (2n = 8x = 56); B. arvensis × B. erectus (2n = 10x = 70). Chloroplast DNA of the parental species was digested with BamHI, EcoRI and HindIII and species-specific restriction fragment length polymorphisms were identified by observation of ethidium bromide stained agarose gels as well as by filter hybridization experiments involving heterologous cloned barley cpDNA probes. The stability of these point mutations was verified by examining the cpDNA restriction patterns of at least 28 individual plants raised from seed of each of the parental species. No intraspecific cpDNA variability was detected. All the F1 progeny examined exhibited the cpDNA restriction fragment patterns of the female parent. There was no evidence of any paternal or biparental cpDNA inheritance. The results provided evidence for the uniparental-maternal inheritance of cpDNA in the Bromus crosses examined.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".