MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1676672194 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2013-0502

Single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) identified through genotyping-by-sequencing improve genetic stock identification of Chinook salmon (<i>Oncorhynchus tshawytscha</i>) from western Alaska

2014· article· en· W1676672194 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wesley A. Larson, James E. Seeb, Carita E. Pascal, William D. Templin, Lisa W. Seeb

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAlaska Sustainable Salmon FundNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationAlaska Department of Fish and GameGordon and Betty Moore FoundationU.S. Department of CommerceNational Science Foundation
KeywordsOncorhynchusChinook windSingle-nucleotide polymorphismBiologyGenotypingSNP genotypingGeneticsSNPFisheryGenotypeGeneFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Genetic stock identification (GSI), an important tool for fisheries management that relies upon the ability to differentiate stocks of interest, can be difficult when populations are closely related. Here we genotyped 11 850 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) from existing DNA sequence data available in five closely related populations of Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) from western Alaska. We then converted a subset of 96 of these SNPs displaying high differentiation into high-throughput genotyping assays. These 96 SNPs (RAD96) and 191 SNPs developed previously (CTC191) were screened in 28 populations from western Alaska. Regional assignment power was evaluated for five different SNP panels, including a panel containing the 96 SNPs with the highest FST across the CTC191 and RAD96 panels (FST96). Assignment tests indicated that SNPs in the RAD96 were more useful for GSI than those in the CTC191 and that increasing the number of reporting groups in western Alaska from one to three was feasible with the FST96. Our approach represents an efficient way to discover SNPs for GSI and should be applicable to other populations and species.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.198 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations73
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207