The nucleotypic effects of cellular DNA content in cartilaginous and ray-finned fishes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cytological and organismal characteristics associated with cellular DNA content underpin most adaptionist interpretations of genome size variation. Since fishes are the only group of vertebrate for which relationships between genome size and key cellular parameters are uncertain, the cytological correlates of genome size were examined in this group. The cell and nuclear areas of erythrocytes showed a highly significant positive correlation with each other and with genome size across 22 cartilaginous and 201 ray-finned fishes. Regressions remained significant at all taxonomic levels, as well as among different fish lineages. However, the results revealed that cartilaginous fishes possess higher cytogenomic ratios than ray-finned fishes, as do cold-water fishes relative to their warm-water counterparts. Increases in genome size owing to ploidy shifts were found to influence cell and nucleus size in an immediate and causative manner, an effect that persists in ancient polyploid lineages. These correlations with cytological parameters known to have important influences on organismal phenotypes support an adaptive interpretation for genome size variation in fishes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".