MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A BIRD'S-EYE VIEW OF THE C-VALUE ENIGMA: GENOME SIZE, CELL SIZE, AND METABOLIC RATE IN THE CLASS AVES

2002· article· en· W2180171672 on OpenAlexafffund
T. Ryan Gregory

Bibliographic record

VenueEvolution · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPhysiological and biochemical adaptations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Guelph
KeywordsGenome sizeBiologyGenomeCell sizeEvolutionary biologyValue (mathematics)Metabolic rateHierarchyGeneticsGeneStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For half a century, variation in genome size (C-value) has been an unresolved puzzle in evolutionary biology. While the initial "C-value paradox" was solved with the discovery of noncoding DNA, a much more complex "C-value enigma" remains. The present study focuses on one aspect of this puzzle, namely the small genome sizes of birds. Significant negative correlations are reported between resting metabolic rate and both C-value and erythrocyte size. Cell size is positively correlated with both nucleus size and C-value in birds, as in other vertebrates. These findings shed light on the constraints acting on genome size in birds and illustrate the importance of interactions among various levels of the biological hierarchy, ranging from the subchromosomal to the ecological. Following from a discussion of the mechanistic bases of the correlations reported and the processes by which birds achieved and/or maintain small genomes, a pluralistic approach to the C-value enigma is recommended.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.013
Scholarly communication0.0040.012
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations242
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvolutionSame topicPhysiological and biochemical adaptationsFrench-language works237,207