MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Bindin from a sea star

2009· article· en· W2131464576 on OpenAlexaff
Susana Patiño, Jan Aagaard, Michael J. MacCoss, Willie J. Swanson, Michael W. Hart

Bibliographic record

VenueEvolution & Development · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMarine Biology and Environmental Chemistry
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
KeywordsBiologyEvolutionary biologySea urchinPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The genetic basis for the evolution of development includes genes that encode proteins expressed on the surfaces of sperm and eggs. Previous studies of the sperm acrosomal protein bindin have helped to characterize the adaptive evolution of gamete compatibility and speciation in sea urchins. The absence of evidence for bindin expression in taxa other than the Echinoidea has limited such studies to sea urchins, and led to the suggestion that bindin might be a sea urchin-specific molecule. Here we characterize the gene that encodes bindin in a broadcast-spawning asterinid sea star (Patiria miniata). We describe the sequence and domain structure of a full-length bindin cDNA and its single intron. In comparison with sea urchins, P. miniata bindin is larger but the two molecules share several general features of their domain structure and some sequence features of two domains. Our results extend the known evolutionary history of bindin from the Mesozoic (among the crown group sea urchins) into the early Paleozoic (and the common ancestor of eleutherozoans), and present new opportunities for understanding the role of bindin molecular evolution in sexual selection, life history evolution, and speciation among sea stars.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.162
Teacher spread0.158 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations22
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvolution & DevelopmentSame topicMarine Biology and Environmental ChemistryFrench-language works237,207