MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2203634639 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2012-0296

First evidence of the presence of<i>NK2</i>and<i>Tlx</i>genes in bivalve molluscs

2013· article· en· W2203634639 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Crimgilt Mesías-Gansbiller, A. Pazos, José L. Sánchez, M. Luz Pérez‐Parallé

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDevelopmental Biology and Gene Regulation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgencia Española de Cooperación Internacional para el Desarrollo
KeywordsBiologyGeneGeneticsOstrea edulisEvolutionary biologyOysterEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The NK homeobox gene cluster appears to play a primary role in the mesoderm specification and formation and nervous system development of Bilateria. NK2 class genes are transcribed in the developing gut, nervous system, and heart of insects and vertebrates. Tlx genes are involved in a variety of developmental functions such as neurone differentiation. To identify NK box genes in bivalve molluscs, we performed a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) survey with degenerate primers on genomic DNA. Three NK box sequences were identified from two bivalve species: one from the clam Venerupis pullastra (Montagu, 1803) called Vpu Tlx and two from the oyster Ostrea edulis L., 1758 called Oed Tlx and Oed Nk2. The alignment of these sequences in the UniProt database reveals a high level of conservation. Phylogenetic analyses by NJ, UPGMA, ME, MP, and ML analyses show the orthology relationships of the Tlx and Nk2 genes with other Tlx and Nk2 genes present in Metazoa genomes. This is the first report of the isolation of NK box genes in bivalve molluscs. Moreover these Tlx and Nk2 genes are the first to prove that Tlx and NK2 gene cognates exist in bivalve molluscs. The presence of these genes in Venerupis and Ostrea suggests that these genes could be conserved in bivalves in general.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

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 head0.214
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicDevelopmental Biology and Gene RegulationFrench-language works237,207