Polytene chromosomes and phylogenetic relationships of Chironomus atrella (Diptera: Chironomidae) in North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The identity of Chironomus atrella Townes has been confusing because the name has been used for at least 2 quite different species. This situation is clarified karyosystematically by describing the banding patterns and chromosomal polymorphisms from a number of locations in Canada and the US. Most populations show only moderate levels of polymorphism (average heterozygosity, 0.36), although in some samples from shallow waters, the level of polymorphism is much higher (average heterozygosity, up to 0.92). The banding patterns of the polytene chromosomes are either identical or closely related to those found in Holarctic species with a northern distribution. These patterns and the distribution of inversions in the C. atrella populations are consistent with a progenitor that colonized North America across the Bering Strait and spread down the Rocky Mountain chain; at the same time, new gene combinations developed that allowed it to spread eastward over the majority of the continent.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".