MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2525968973 · doi:10.3897/bdj.4.e10003

Salix transect of Europe: variation in ploidy and genome size in willow-associated common nettle, Urtica dioica L. sens. lat., from Greece to arctic Norway

2016· article· en· W2525968973 on OpenAlexaff
Quentin Cronk, Oriane Hidalgo, Jaume Pellicer, Diana M. Percy, Ilia J. Leitch

Bibliographic record

VenueBiodiversity Data Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicYeasts and Rust Fungi Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsBiologyPloidyGenome sizeGene flowBotanyPopulationUrtica dioicaGenomeTransectEcologyGenetic variationGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: L. sensu lato, is an invertebrate "superhost", its clonal patches maintaining large populations of insects and molluscs. It is extremely widespread in Europe and highly variable, and two ploidy levels (diploid and tetraploid) are known. However, geographical patterns in cytotype variation require further study. NEW INFORMATION: -associated insects). Using flow cytometry to measure genome size, our sample of 29 plants reveals 5 diploids and 24 tetraploids. Two diploids were found in SE Europe (Bulgaria and Romania) and three diploids in S. Finland. More detailed cytotype surveys in these regions are suggested. The tetraploid genome size (2C value) varied between accessions from 2.36 to 2.59 pg. The diploids varied from 1.31 to 1.35 pg per 2C nucleus, equivalent to a haploid genome size of c. 650 Mbp. Within the tetraploids, we find that the most northerly samples (from N. Finland and arctic Norway) have a generally higher genome size. This is possibly indicative of a distinct population in this region.

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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations10
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiodiversity Data JournalSame topicYeasts and Rust Fungi StudiesFrench-language works237,207