MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2006566734 · doi:10.5539/jas.v1n1p53

Genetic Analysis of Scleropages formosus Golden Asian Arowana Using Microsatellite DNA

2009· article· en· W2006566734 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xidong Mu, Yinchang Hu, Xuejie Wang, Xiaohui Li, Hongmei Song, Jianren Luo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChinese Academy of Fishery Sciences
KeywordsMicrosatelliteBiologyGenetic diversityLoss of heterozygosityPopulationEvolutionary biologyEndangered speciesGeneticsAlleleGenetic variationZoologyGeneEcologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Asian arowana (Scleropages formosus) is a highly endangered fish species listed in Appendix 1 of CITES since1980.Inorder to explore the population genetic structure of golden Asian arowanas Scleropages formosus from the breedingpopulation, of 26 fish sampled were genotyped at twenty microsatellite loci. The average allele number of 14polymorphic microsatellites was 2.94 loci. The average observed heterozygosity was 0.446 ranging from 0.143 to 1.00,and the gene diversity was quite high (0.78).All these data suggest that middle level of genetic diversity existed in thegolden Asian arowana population. Data showed the population somewhat departed from HWE, such as excessive anddeficient heterozygote numbers.AMOVA analysis offered evidence of a weak genetic differentiation with 0.51%variation between samples.

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)0.000
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
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.240
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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural Science→Same topicGenetic diversity and population structure→French-language works237,207→