MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011304042 · doi:10.1139/g08-099

Mitotic and polytene chromosome analysis in the Mexican fruit fly,<i>Anastrepha ludens</i>(Loew) (Diptera: Tephritidae)

2009· article· en· W2011304042 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Víctor García‐Martínez, Emilio Hernández⋆, C. S. Zepeta-Cisneros, A. S. Robinson, A. Zacharopoulou, Gérald Franz

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect behavior and control techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolytene chromosomeBiologyCeratitis capitataTephritidaeAnastrephaAutosomeGeneticsKaryotypeChromosomeBotanyPEST analysisGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study constitutes the first attempt to construct a polytene chromosome map of an Anastrepha species, Anastrepha ludens (Loew), a major agricultural pest. The mitotic karyotype has a diploid complement of 12 acrocentric chromosomes, including five pairs of autosomes and an XX/XY sex chromosome pair. The analysis of salivary gland polytene chromosomes has shown a total number of five polytene elements that correspond to the five autosomes. The characteristic features and the most prominent landmarks of each chromosome are described. By comparing chromosome banding patterns, the possible chromosomal homology between A. ludens and Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann) is presented. This work shows that polytene maps of A. ludens are suitable for cytogenetic studies in this species and may be used as reference for other Anastrepha species, most of which are also serious agricultural pests.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations33
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicInsect behavior and control techniquesFrench-language works237,207