MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102118092 · doi:10.1093/genetics/155.3.1313

Slipped-Strand Mispairing at Noncontiguous Repeats in <i>Poecilia reticulata</i>: A Model for Minisatellite Birth

2000· article· en· W2102118092 on OpenAlexaff
John S. Taylor, Felix Breden

Bibliographic record

VenueGenetics · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMinisatelliteVariable number tandem repeatTandem repeatBiologyGeneticsDirect repeatTrinucleotide repeat expansionRepeated sequenceMicrosatelliteDNAGenomeGeneBase sequenceGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The standard slipped-strand mispairing (SSM) model for the formation of variable number tandem repeats (VNTRs) proposes that a few tandem repeats, produced by chance mutations, provide the "raw material" for VNTR expansion. However, this model is unlikely to explain the formation of VNTRs with long motifs (e.g., minisatellites), because the likelihood of a tandem repeat forming by chance decreases rapidly as the length of the repeat motif increases. Phylogenetic reconstruction of the birth of a mitochondrial (mt) DNA minisatellite in guppies suggests that VNTRs with long motifs can form as a consequence of SSM at noncontiguous repeats. VNTRs formed in this manner have motifs longer than the noncontiguous repeat originally formed by chance and are flanked by one unit of the original, noncontiguous repeat. SSM at noncontiguous repeats can therefore explain the birth of VNTRs with long motifs and the "imperfect" or "short direct" repeats frequently observed adjacent to both mtDNA and nuclear VNTRs.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.675
Threshold uncertainty score0.917

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations36
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeneticsSame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207