MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075776206 · doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1000925

Absence of Evidence for MHC–Dependent Mate Selection within HapMap Populations

2010· article· en· W2075776206 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Adnan Derti, Can Cenik, Peter Kraft, Frederick P. Roth

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS Genetics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Human Genome Research InstituteNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institutes of HealthCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsBiologyInternational HapMap ProjectMajor histocompatibility complexLocus (genetics)Evolutionary biologyGeneticsMate choiceSexual selectionHaplotypeGeneAllele

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The major histocompatibility complex (MHC) of immunity genes has been reported to influence mate choice in vertebrates, and a recent study presented genetic evidence for this effect in humans. Specifically, greater dissimilarity at the MHC locus was reported for European-American mates (parents in HapMap Phase 2 trios) than for non-mates. Here we show that the results depend on a few extreme data points, are not robust to conservative changes in the analysis procedure, and cannot be reproduced in an equivalent but independent set of European-American mates. Although some evidence suggests an avoidance of extreme MHC similarity between mates, rather than a preference for dissimilarity, limited sample sizes preclude a rigorous investigation. In summary, fine-scale molecular-genetic data do not conclusively support the hypothesis that mate selection in humans is influenced by the MHC locus.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.252
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

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 head0.227
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.104 · 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

Citations41
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS GeneticsSame topicAnimal Behavior and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207