MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104632751 · doi:10.1104/pp.114.248708

Insights into Conifer Giga-Genomes

2014· review· en· W2104632751 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePLANT PHYSIOLOGY · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsMinistry of ForestsUniversity of British ColumbiaGenome British ColumbiaUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenomeGymnospermBiologyPinaceaePinus <genus>Evolutionary biologyPlant biologyGenome sizeFlowering plantPlant evolutionBotanyGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Insights from sequenced genomes of major land plant lineages have advanced research in almost every aspect of plant biology. Until recently, however, assembled genome sequences of gymnosperms have been missing from this picture. Conifers of the pine family (Pinaceae) are a group of gymnosperms that dominate large parts of the world's forests. Despite their ecological and economic importance, conifers seemed long out of reach for complete genome sequencing, due in part to their enormous genome size (20-30 Gb) and the highly repetitive nature of their genomes. Technological advances in genome sequencing and assembly enabled the recent publication of three conifer genomes: white spruce (Picea glauca), Norway spruce (Picea abies), and loblolly pine (Pinus taeda). These genome sequences revealed distinctive features compared with other plant genomes and may represent a window into the past of seed plant genomes. This Update highlights recent advances, remaining challenges, and opportunities in light of the publication of the first conifer and gymnosperm genomes.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.245 · 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