MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cytochrome-b sequence variation among parrots

2008· article· en· W2001748631 on OpenAlexaff
Tim P. Birt, Vicki L. Friesen, J. M. Green, William A. Montevecchi, William S. Davidson

Bibliographic record

VenueHereditas · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicIdentification and Quantification in Food
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ontario MuseumMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyTransversionCytochrome bPhylogenetic treeLineage (genetic)GeneticsEvolutionary biologySequence (biology)Mitochondrial DNAPhylogeneticsTaxonZoologyGeneEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The nucleotide sequence of a 307 bp fragment of the mitochondrial cytochrome-b gene was determined for 12 species of parrot, using the polymerase chain reaction and direct sequencing. Sequence divergence ranged from 26-54 differences in pairwise comparisons, with the majority of base substitutions occurring at third positions of codons. The transition:transversion ratio was determined to be higher (approximately 24.3:1) in recently divergent parrot lineages than has generally been observed in other groups. Strongly biased base composition, particularly at the third position of codons, is evident among the sequences. Phylogenetic relationships among more divergent taxa were estimated, using only transversion substitutions, while all the substitutions were useful for closely related taxa. The African genera Psittacus and Poicephalus are closely related, in contrast to the Australian genera Nymphicus, Purpureicephalus and Melopsittacus, which represent more divergent lineages. The cockatoos appear to represent an ancient lineage within the parrots.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations40
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHereditasSame topicIdentification and Quantification in FoodFrench-language works237,207