Cytogenetic characterization of the invasive mussel species <i>Xenostrobus securis</i> Lmk. (Bivalvia: Mytilidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The chromosomes of the invasive black-pigmy mussel (Xenostrobus securis (Lmk. 1819)) were analyzed by means of 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI) / propidium iodide (PI) and chromomycin A3 (CMA) / DAPI fluorescence staining and fluorescent in situ hybridization using major rDNA, 5S rDNA, core histone genes, linker histone genes, and telomeric sequences as probes. The diploid chromosome number in this species is 2n = 30. The karyotype is composed of seven metacentric, one meta/submetacentric, and seven submetacentric chromosome pairs. Telomeric sequences appear at both ends of every single chromosome. Major rDNA clusters appear near the centromeres on chromosome pairs 1 and 3 and are associated with bright CMA fluorescence and dull DAPI fluorescence. This species shows five 5S rDNA clusters close to the centromeres on four chromosome pairs (2, 5, 6, and 8). Three of the four core histone gene clusters map to centromeric positions on chromosome pairs 7, 10, and 13. The fourth core histone gene cluster occupies a terminal position on chromosome pair 8, also bearing a 5S rDNA cluster. The two linker histone gene clusters are close to the centromeres on chromosome pairs 12 and 14. Therefore, the use of these probes allows the unequivocal identification of 11 of the 15 chromosome pairs that compose the karyotype of X. securis.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".