MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163301358 · doi:10.1139/g06-089

Molecular evolution of satellite DNA repeats and speciation of lizards of the genus Darevskia (Sauria: Lacertidae)

2006· article· en· W2163301358 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
В. В. Гречко, Doina Ciobanu, Ilya S. Darevsky, S. A. Kosushkin, Dmitri A. Kramerov

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyLacertidaeSauriaZoologyGenusLizardSubfamilyEcologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Satellite DNA repeats were studied in Caucasian populations of 18 rock lizard species of the genus Darevskia. Four subfamilies (Caucasian Lacerta satellites (CLsat)I-IV) were identified, which shared 70%-75% sequence similarity. The distribution of CLsat subfamilies among the species was studied. All the species could be divided into at least 3 clades, depending on the content of CLsat subfamilies in each genome: "saxicola", "rudis", and "mixta" lizards. CLsatI was found in all studied species, but in very different quantities; the "saxicola" group contained this subfamily predominantly. The "rudis" group also contained CLsatIII, and the "mixta" group carried considerable amounts of CLsatII. The highest concentrations of CLsatI and CLsatII were detected in 2 ground lizards--D. derjugini and D. praticola, respectively. D. parvula predominantly carried CLsatIII. CLsatIV was found only in the Crimean species D. lindholmi. The distribution patterns of satellite subfamilies show possible postglacial speciation within the genus Darevskia. A hybrid origin of species that possess 2 or 3 CLsat subfamilies and important clarifications to the systematics of the genus are proposed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.595
Threshold uncertainty score0.284

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations27
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicEvolution and Genetic DynamicsFrench-language works237,207