Given a passage, construct a question on the basis of the information present in the passage. Construct the question in such a way that (i) it is unambiguous, (ii) it is answerable from the passage, (iii) its answer is unique (iv) it answer uses text phrases from the passage. Avoid creating questions that (i) can't be answered correctly without actually understanding the passage and (ii) uses the same words or phrases given in the passage.

Input: Consider Input: Sprague and Tatum (1942) introduced the concepts of general combining ability (GCA) and specific combining ability (SCA) to evaluate the breeding parents and F1 hybrid performance, respectively. Since then, the GCA was widely used in cross breeding for elite parent selection. However, the molecular basis of GCA remains to unknown.', 'We studied the transcriptomes of three varieties and threeF1 hybrids using RNA-Sequencing. Transcriptome sequence analysis revealed that the transcriptome profiles of the F1s were similar to the positive GCA-effect parent. Moreover, the expression levels of most differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were equal to the parent with a positive GCA effect. Analysis of the gene expression patterns of gibberellic acid (GA) and flowering time pathways that determine plant height and flowering time in rice validated the preferential transcriptome expression of the parents with positive GCA effect. Furthermore, H3K36me3 modification bias in the Pseudo-Response Regulators (PRR) gene family was observed in the positive GCA effect parents and demonstrated that the phenotype and transcriptome bias in the positive GCA effect parents have been epigenetically regulated by either global modification or specific signaling pathways in rice.

Output: Is the phenotypic predisposition of the parent in F1 hybrid correlated with transcriptome preference of the positive general combining ability parent?

Input: Consider Input: A significant proportion of school-aged children experience special health care needs (SCHN) and seek care from pediatricians with a wide range of condition types and severity levels. This study examines the learning pathways of children with established (already diagnosed at school entry) and emerging (teacher identified) SHCN from school entry through the elementary school years.', 'The Longitudinal Study of Australian Children (LSAC) is a nationally representative clustered cross-sequential sample of 2 cohorts of Australian children which commenced in May 2004. Data were analyzed from the LSAC kindergarten cohort (n=4,983), as well as a subsample of 720 children for whom teachers also completed the Australian Early Development Index checklist, a measure of early childhood development at school entry that includes SHCN.', 'Latent class analysis was utilized to establish 3 academic trajectories from 4-5 to 10-11 years: high (24.3%), average (49.8%), and low (23.6%). Descriptive statistics revealed a trend for both children with established and emerging SHCN to fall into weaker performing learning pathways. Multinomial logistic regression focusing on those children with emerging SHCN confirmed this pattern of results, even after adjustment for covariates (relative risk 3.06, 95% confidence interval 1.03-9.10). Children who additionally had low socioeconomic standing were particularly at risk.

Output: Does learning trajectories of children with special health care need across the severity spectrum?

Input: Consider Input: Macroprolactinemia is a frequent finding in hyperprolactinemic individuals, usually without clinical impact. Data on biological activity of macroprolactin (bbPRL) are controversial and mostly based on a heterologous rat Nb2 cell bioassay. Biological activity of bbPRL observed in vitro but not in vivo may be due to its high molecular weight, preventing its passage through capillary barrier. Alternatively, bbPRL bioactivity may differ depending on the prolactin (PRL) receptor (PRLR) species specificity.', 'The objective of the study was to characterize the bioactivity of bbPRL in a homologous bioassay: Ba/F-3 cells stably expressing the human PRLR.', "Chromatography-purified bbPRL from macroprolactinemic individuals (group I, n = 18) and monomeric PRL from hyperprolactinemic patients without macroprolactinemia (group II, n = 5) were tested in Nb2 and Ba/F-LLP bioassays. Both groups were followed up at the neuroendocrinology outpatients' clinic.", 'Biological activity of bbPRL presented in the two bioassays was measured.', 'In group I, no patient had hypogonadism. Mean ratio bioactivity to immunoactivity of bbPRL in the Nb2 assay was 0.69. There was no dose-response in 15 of the 18 samples tested in Ba/F-LLP assay. In group II, three patients had galactorrhea and all five had hypogonadism. Mean ratio bioactivity to immunoactivity of monomeric PRL samples was 1.35 in Nb2 and 0.91 in Ba/F-LLP assay.
Output: Does human macroprolactin display low biological activity via its homologous receptor in a new sensitive bioassay?