Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(3)
Classification of chromosome complement based on centromere position at mitotic metaphase followed Levan et al. (1964).
Classification of the chromosome complements based on centromere position at mitotic metaphase follows Levan et al. (1964).
Thorneycroft [ 30, 31] first karyotyped the species, reporting a diploid chromosome number of 82 or 84, and based on centromere position, presumed pericentric inversions in both chromosome 2 and 3. Here, our karyotypic analyses confirm a diploid number of 82, with the typical avian pattern of approximately 30 pairs of microchromosomes.
Similar(57)
The classification of the chromosome complements based on the centromere position at mitotic metaphase described in Levan et al. ([1964]) was adopted.
As the staining intensity is reduced at the centromere, this approach provided the information on centromere position (centromeric index) and the number of centromeres.
Unfortunately, we do not have information on centromere positions, and can, therefore, only speculate on this.
Classification of chromosome morphology is based on the position of the centromere, following Levan et al. (1964).
We also characterized the contigs that contained a part of the nucleolus organizer region or centromere based on their positions on the RH map and the assembled BAC clone sequences.
Sensors are named based on their position.
For example, based on the position where we hypothesize that a fusion event occurred between ancestral chromosomes A1 and A2 to form PG1, we may infer that the centromere is located in the central part of this chromosome (30 45 cM from the top).
Chromosome 13 has two different genomic profiles based on the start position of the genomic gain: a) loss from the centromere to the 13q31 or 13q32 chromosomal band, with gain or amplification extending from 13q31 to the telomere (cases 1, 3, 4, 6, and 7); or b) copy neutral from the centromere to 13q21 and gain or amplification from 13q21 to the telomere (cases 2 and 5).
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com