Molecular cloning of Pit‐1 cDNA and genomic DNA of the domestic duck (<i>Anas platyrhynchos</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The expression of unique isoform of pituitary transcription factor (Pit‐1) is reported in the chicken and turkey. However, it is not well known whether this isoform is expressed in the other avian species. In the present study, complementary DNA (cDNA) and genomic DNA, of Pit‐1 of domesticated duck, were cloned and sequenced. Duck Pit‐1α was found to have 93.3, and 92.4% sequence identity at the cDNA level to Pit‐1α of chicken and turkey, respectively. The predicted amino acid sequence had 96.7% similarity with a comparable region of Pit‐1α of both chicken and turkey. Based on the cDNA sequence, the genomic structure of the gene was characterized. The duck Pit‐1 gene consisted of seven exons and six introns. Sequence analysis of the duck Pit‐1 gene allowed for the design of a forward primer for amplification of Pit‐1γ, which is synthesized from an alternative transcription initiation site in galliforms. Reverse transcription of total RNA followed by polymerase chain reaction successively amplified a 984 bp product of Pit‐1γ cDNA, which encoded a peptide of 326 amino acids. These results suggest that the expression of Pit‐1 isoform originates from a different site of transcription initiation, which is not unique to galliforms but is observed in other avian species including anseriforms.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".