MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150880591 · doi:10.1266/ggs.85.121

Evolution of two Rh blood group-related genes of the amphioxus species Branchiostoma floridae

2010· article· en· W2150880591 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Takashi Kitano, Masahiro Satou, Naruya Saitou

Bibliographic record

VenueGenes & Genetic Systems · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of Genetics
KeywordsBiologyPhylogenetic treeGeneGeneticsGene duplicationIntronExonPhylogeneticsEvolutionary biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We determined cDNAs of two genes that belong to the Rhesus (Rh) blood group gene family in an amphioxus species (Branchiostoma floridae) and designated them Rh-related-1 (RhR-1) and Rh-related-2 (RhR-2). RhR-1 and RhR-2 consisted of 10 and 11 exons, respectively. 3' UTR sequences of RhR-1 were shorter (220-272 bp) than those of RhR-2 (1,505-1,650 bp). CDS lengths were 1,344 and 1,476 bp for RhR-1 and RhR-2, respectively, and the average nucleotide difference between their CDS regions was 0.33. The corresponding regions of Rh genes from exons 2 to 7 were relatively conserved among the chordate species examined in this study. Length difference numbers were in multiples of three, which implies that codon frames were conserved among them, and the same exon/intron boundary phases were observed in those regions. This region was used for the phylogenetic analyses. RhR-1 and RhR-2 formed a cluster on the phylogenetic tree of the Rh gene family. Gene duplication time of RhR-1 and RhR-2 was estimated to be ca. 500 million years ago. It is likely that the four Rh family genes in vertebrates emerged by gene duplications in the common ancestor of vertebrates, and functional differentiation has occurred after the first gene duplication.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations9
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenes & Genetic SystemsSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207