MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2410233810 · doi:10.1080/19401730802570942

Phylogeographic analysis of complete mtDNA genomes from Walleye Pollock (<i>Gadus chalcogrammus</i>Pallas, 1811) shows an ancient origin of genetic biodiversity

2008· article· en· W2410233810 on OpenAlexaff
Steven M. Carr, H. Dawn Marshall

Bibliographic record

VenueDNA sequence · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicIdentification and Quantification in Food
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyPollockMitochondrial DNAEvolutionary biologyCoalescent theoryPopulationPhylogeographyGadusMost recent common ancestorZoologyGenomeGeneticsPhylogenetic treeFisheryGeneFish <Actinopterygii>Demography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ursvik et al. compared the complete mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) genome sequences of Walleye Pollock (Gadus ( = Theragra) chalcogrammus) from the Pacific Ocean with a pair of fish from an isolated population of Norwegian pollock in the Barents Sea. They concluded that the Norwegian population was recently introduced from the Pacific. We test this hypothesis within a temporal framework provided by a phylogeographic analysis of complete genomes from the pollocks' sister species, Atlantic Cod (Gadus morhua), and their divergence 3.5 mya. Pollock have a coalescent ancestor 189 +/- 25 kya. The two Norwegian fish have a common ancestor 87 +/- 7 kya, which suggests an ancient origin rather than a recent human-mediated introduction. Mitochondrial genomic biodiversity in pollock antedates the most recent glacial cycle. The clade structure of the whole-genome tree indicates that previously described single-locus mtDNA haplotypes and haplogroups are typically paraphyletic.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations26
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDNA sequenceSame topicIdentification and Quantification in FoodFrench-language works237,207