Molecular cloning of the duck <i>MyoG</i> and <i>MRF4</i> genes coding region sequence and their differential expression patterns in the breast and leg muscle during fetal development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The MyoG and MRF4 genes encode for transcription factors that play key roles in muscle formation during embryonic and fetal development. Due to the unique functions of these two genes, they have a specific expression pattern in the same muscle tissues. In order to investigate the different developmental expression patterns of the two genes, the coding region sequences of duck MyoG and MRF4 were cloned and their mRNA expression patterns in the duck breast and leg muscles were measured using real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR). The duck MyoG and MRF4 both have a basic helix-loop-helix (bHLH) domain with high homology to several other species. In addition, there is a low homology region at the carboxy-terminus of these two proteins. The mRNA expression of MyoG reaches a peak at embryonic day 14 (E14d) in both the breast muscle and the leg muscle of duck. The peak mRNA expression of MRF4 appears at E14d in the breast muscle and at E18d in the leg muscle. The expression patterns of MyoG and MRF4 were different between the breast muscle and the leg muscle of duck. In the fetal duck, the leg muscle develops earlier than the breast muscle, which may better accommodate the newborn duck to a new environment postnatally.Key words: Duck, MyoG and MRF4, expression pattern, fetal development
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".