MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2030648153 · doi:10.1139/g06-047

Molecular characterization of ribosomal intergenic spacer in the tadpole shrimp<i>Triops cancriformis</i>(Crustacea, Branchiopoda, Notostraca)

2006· article· en· W2030648153 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Andrea Luchetti, Franca Scanabissi, Barbara Mantovani

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Eye Institute
KeywordsBiologyGeneticsRibosomal DNAIntergenic regionRibosomal RNASpacer DNARibosomal Intergenic Spacer analysisInternal transcribed spacerConcerted evolutionRepeated sequenceGenePhylogeneticsGenome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nuclear ribosomal DNA constitutes a multigene family, with tandemly arranged units linked by an intergenic spacer (IGS), which contains initiation/termination transcription signals and usually tandemly arranged subrepeats. The structure and variability of the IGS region are analyzed here in hermaphroditic and parthenogenetic populations of the "living fossil" Triops cancriformis (Branchiopoda, Notostraca). The results indicate the presence of concerted evolution at the population level for this G+C-rich IGS region as a whole, with the major amount of genetic variability found outside the subrepeat region. The subrepeats region is composed of 3 complete repeats (a, c, d) intermingled with 3 repeat fragments (b, e, f) and unrelated sequences. The most striking datum is the absolute identity of subrepeats (except type d) occupying the same position in different individuals/populations. A putative promoter sequence is present upstream of the 18S rRNA gene, but not in subrepeats, which is at variance with other arthropod IGSs. The absence of a promoter sequence in the subrepeats and subrepeat sequence conservation suggests that this region acts as an enhancer simply by its repetitive nature, as observed in some vertebrates. The putative external transcribed spacer (840 bp) shows hairpin structures, as in yeasts, protozoans, Drosophila, and vertebrates.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 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

Citations17
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenome→Same topicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies→French-language works237,207→