Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37378555›Full record

ArticleGenetics2023

Recombination and sterility in inversion homo- and heterokaryotypes under a general counting model of chiasma interference.

Øystein Kapperud

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Øystein KapperudCentre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis, University of Oslo, 0371 Oslo, Norway.
University of Oslo · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Crossing Over, GeneticInfertilityCentromereChromosome InversionChromosome PairingHumansMeiosischiasma interferencechromosomal inversionsmeiotic recombination

Identifiers

PMID37378555
PMCPMC10471206
OpenAlexW4382343767

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.