MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060005977 · doi:10.1139/g02-050

Genome size and developmental parameters in the homeothermic vertebrates

2002· article· en· W2060005977 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
T. Ryan Gregory

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPhysiological and biochemical adaptations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Guelph
KeywordsBiologyGenome sizeGenomeEvolutionary biologyLongevityVertebrateGenome evolutionPloidyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although unrelated to any intuitive notions of organismal complexity, haploid genome sizes (C values) are correlated with a variety of cellular and organismal parameters in different taxa. In some cases, these relationships are universal--notably, genome size correlates positively with cell size in each of the vertebrate classes. Other relationships are apparently relevant only in particular groups. For example, although genome size is inversely correlated with metabolic rate in both mammals and birds, no such relationship is found in amphibians. More recently, it has been suggested that developmental rate and (or) longevity are related to genome size in birds. In the present study, a large dataset was used to examine possible relationships between genome size and various developmental parameters in both birds and mammals. In neither group does development appear to be of relevance to genome size evolution (except perhaps indirectly in birds through the intermediation of body size and (or) within the rodents), a situation very different from that found in amphibians. These findings make it clear that genome size evolution cannot be understood without reference to the particular biology of the organisms under study.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0020.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.167 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations50
Published2002
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicPhysiological and biochemical adaptationsFrench-language works237,207