Comparative chromosome painting of pronghorn (Antilocapra americana) and saola (Pseudoryx nghetinhensis) karyotypes with human and dromedary camel probes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pronghorn (Antilocapridae, 2n = 58) and saola (Bovidae, 2n = 50) are members of Pecora, a highly diversified group of even-toed hoofed mammals. Karyotypes of these species were not involved in chromosome painting studies despite their intriguing phylogenetic positions in Pecora. RESULTS: To trace the chromosome evolution during very fast radiation of main families from the common Pecoran ancestor, high-resolution comparative chromosome maps of pronghorn and saola with human (HSA) and dromedary camel (CDR) painting probes were established. The human and dromedary camel painting probes revealed 50 and 64 conserved segments respectively in the pronghorn genome, while 51 and 63 conserved segments respectively in the saola genome. Integrative analysis with published comparative maps showed that inversions in chromosomes homologous to CDR19/35/19 (HSA 10/20/10), CDR12/34/12 (HSA12/22/12/22), CDR10/33/10 (HSA 11) are present in representatives of all five living Pecoran families. The pronghorn karyotype could have formed from a putative 2n = 58 Pecoran ancestral karyotype by one fission and one fusion and that the saola karyotype differs from the presumed 2n = 60 bovid ancestral karyotype (2n = 60) by five fusions. CONCLUSION: The establishment of high-resolution comparative maps for pronghorn and saola has shed some new insights into the putative ancestral karyotype, chromosomal evolution and phylogenic relationships in Pecora. No cytogenetic signature rearrangements were found that could unite the Antilocapridae with Giraffidae or with any other Pecoran families. Our data on the saola support a separate position of Pseudorigyna subtribe rather than its affinity to either Bovina or Bubalina, but the saola phylogenetic position within Bovidae remains unresolved.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".