A first‐generation microsatellite linkage map of the ruff
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A linkage map of the ruff (Philomachus pugnax) genome was constructed based on segregation analysis of 58 microsatellite loci from 381 captive-bred individuals spanning fourteen breeding years and comprising 64 families. Twenty-eight of the markers were resolved into seven linkage groups and five single marker loci, homologous to known chicken (Gallus gallus) and zebra finch (Taeniopygia guttata) chromosomes. Linkage groups range from 10.1 to 488.7 cM in length and covered a total map distance of 641.6 cM, corresponding to an estimated 30-35% coverage of the ruff genome, with a mean spacing of 22.9 cM between loci. Through comparative mapping, we are able to assign linkage groups Ppu1, Ppu2, Ppu6, Ppu7, Ppu10, Ppu13, and PpuZ to chromosomes and identify several intrachromosomal rearrangements between the homologs of chicken, zebra finch, and ruff microsatellite loci. This is the first linkage map created in the ruff and is a major step toward providing genomic resources for this enigmatic species. It will provide an essential framework for mapping of phenotypically and behaviorally important loci in the ruff.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".