MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163953149 · doi:10.1139/g09-100

A candidate gene for choanal atresia in alpaca

2010· article· en· W2163953149 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kent M. Reed, Miranda M. Bauer, Kristelle M. Mendoza, Aníbal G. Armién

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Ear and Nasal Anomalies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMorris Animal Foundation
KeywordsBiologyChoanal atresiaCoding regionGeneticsGeneCHARGE syndromeExonSequence (biology)AtresiaAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Choanal atresia (CA) is a common nasal craniofacial malformation in New World domestic camelids (alpaca and llama). CA results from abnormal development of the nasal passages and is especially debilitating to newborn crias. CA in camelids shares many of the clinical manifestations of a similar condition in humans (CHARGE syndrome). Herein we report on the regulatory gene CHD7 of alpaca, whose homologue in humans is most frequently associated with CHARGE. Sequence of the CHD7 coding region was obtained from a non-affected cria. The complete coding region was 9003 bp, corresponding to a translated amino acid sequence of 3000 aa. Additional genomic sequences corresponding to a significant portion of the CHD7 gene were identified and assembled from the 2x alpaca whole genome sequence, providing confirmatory sequence for much of the CHD7 coding region. The alpaca CHD7 mRNA sequence was 97.9% similar to the human sequence, with the greatest sequence difference being an insertion in exon 38 that results in a polyalanine repeat (A12). Polymorphism in this repeat was tested for association with CA in alpaca by cloning and sequencing the repeat from both affected and non-affected individuals. Variation in length of the poly-A repeat was not associated with CA. Complete sequencing of the CHD7 gene will be necessary to determine whether other mutations in CHD7 are the cause of CA in camelids.

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 score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.307

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations17
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicCongenital Ear and Nasal AnomaliesFrench-language works237,207