ArticleGenetics2023
Recombination and sterility in inversion homo- and heterokaryotypes under a general counting model of chiasma interference.
Article in Genetics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recombination Suppression Drives Expansion of the Drosophila Dot Chromosome.Molecular biology and evolution · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It has long been known that the chiasmata are not independently distributed in most organisms, a phenomenon known as chiasma interference. In this paper, I suggest a model of chiasma interference that generalizes the Poisson model, the counting model, the Poisson-skip model, and the two-pathway counting model into a single framework, and use it to derive infinite series expressions for the sterility and recombination pattern probabilities in inversion homo- and heterokaryotypes, and a closed-form expression for the special case of the two-pathway counting model in homokaryotypes. I then use these expressions to perform maximum likelihood parameter estimations for recombination and tetrad data from various species. The results imply that the simpler counting models perform well compared to more complex ones, that interference works in a similar way in homo- and heterokaryotypes, and that the model fits well with data for the latter as well as the former. I also find evidence that the interference signal is broken by the centromere in some species, but not others, suggestions of negative interference in Aspergillus nidulans, and no consistent support for the theory that a second noninterfering chiasma pathway exists only in organisms that require double-strand break for synapsis. I suggest that the latter finding is at least partly due to issues involved in analyzing aggregate data from different experiments and individuals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.