MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064802439 · doi:10.1139/z04-188

DNA content and genome composition of diploid and triploid water frogs belonging to the <i>Rana</i> <i>esculenta</i> complex (Amphibia, Anura)

2004· article· en· W2064802439 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maria Ogielska, Piotr Kierzkowski, Mariusz Rybacki

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicChromosomal and Genetic Variations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyPloidyHybridRana ridibundaMetaphaseChromosomeKaryotypeGenomeGeneticsStainingZoologyMolecular biologyBotanyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Central European water frog Rana esculenta L., 1758 is a natural hybrid between Rana lessonae Camerano, 1882 (LL) and Rana ridibunda Pallas, 1771 (RR). Hybrids are usually diploid (RL) or triploid (LLR or RRL). Distinguishing LL from RL, RR from RL, and LLR from RRL according to external morphology is ambiguous. In this study we checked whether the DNA content in erythrocyte nuclei measured by image cytometry is useful in determination of the taxonomic status of diploids (LL, RR, and RL) and the genome composition of triploids (LLR and RRL). For exact and direct identification of parental species, as well as for determination of genome composition in hybrids, we applied actinomycin D – 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole chromosome staining to metaphase plates. We analyzed 43 LL, 12 RR, and 32 RL diploids, and 37 LLR and 19 RRL triploids. All diploid hybrids had 2n = 26 chromosomes, and all triploid hybrids had 3n = 39 chromosomes. Neither aneuploid nor mosaic hybrids were detected. The expected numbers of 13 R. lessonae (L) and 13 R. ridibunda (R) chromosomes in RL hybrids were recorded in about 31% of individuals. In the rest of the sample the composition was variable, ranging from 9 to 14 R chromosomes and the corresponding number of L chromosomes. The expected composition of 26 L and 13 R chromosomes was detected in about 32% of LLR triploids, whereas in the rest of the sample the composition of chromosomes ranged from 8 to 15 R chromosomes and the corresponding number of L chromosomes. The expected numbers of 26 R and 13 L chromosomes were detected in about 26% of RRL triploids, whereas in the rest of the sample the composition of chromosomes ranged from 19 to 28 R chromosomes and the corresponding number of L chromosomes. The DNA content densitometry showed that RR and RL diploids had 9.5% and 3.8% more DNA, respectively, than LL diploids. These differences, although statistically significant, were not sufficient to unequivocally discriminate LL from RL and RR from RL. Triploids had about 50% more DNA than LL diploids (49% in LLR and 51% in RRL), but these differences were too small for unequivocal determination of their genome composition.

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 categoriesnone
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 score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.921

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.170 · 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.

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

Citations34
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicChromosomal and Genetic VariationsFrench-language works237,207