MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999001793 · doi:10.1139/g03-042

A first-generation map of the turkey genome

2003· article· en· W1999001793 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David E. Harry, David Zaitlin, Paul J. Marini, Kent M. Reed

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and Clinical Aspects of Sex Determination and Chromosomal Abnormalities
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyGeneticsGenBankGenomeGenetic linkageRestriction fragment length polymorphismMeleagris gallopavoRestriction enzymeRestriction mapBovine genomeGene mappingSequence-tagged siteRestriction siteGenePolymerase chain reactionNucleic acid sequenceChromosome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A primary linkage map of the domestic turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) was developed by segregation analysis of genetic markers within a backcross family. This reference family includes 84 offspring from one F1 sire mated to two dams. Genomic DNA was digested using one of five restriction enzymes, and restriction fragment length polymorphisms were detected on Southern blots using probes prepared from 135 random clones isolated from a whole-embryo cDNA library. DNA sequence was subsequently determined for 114 of these cDNA clones. Sequence comparisons were done using BLAST searches of the GenBank database, and redundant sequences were eliminated. High similarity was found between 23% of the turkey sequences and mRNA sequences reported for the chicken. The current map, based on expressed genes, includes 138 loci, encompassing 113 loci arranged into 22 linkage groups and an additional 25 loci that remain unlinked. The average distance between linked markers is 6 cM and the longest linkage group (17 loci) measures 131 cM. The total map distance contained within linkage groups is 651 cM. The present map provides an important framework for future genome mapping in the turkey.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.711
Threshold uncertainty score0.260

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations29
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicGenetic and Clinical Aspects of Sex Determination and Chromosomal AbnormalitiesFrench-language works237,207