Draft genome of the American Eel (<i>Anguilla rostrata</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Freshwater eels (Anguilla sp.) have large economic, cultural, ecological and aesthetic importance worldwide, but they suffered more than 90% decline in global stocks over the past few decades. Proper genetic resources, such as sequenced, assembled and annotated genomes, are essential to help plan sustainable recoveries by identifying physiological, biochemical and genetic mechanisms that caused the declines or that may lead to recoveries. Here, we present the first sequenced genome of the American eel. This genome contained 305 043 contigs (N50 = 7397) and 79 209 scaffolds (N50 = 86 641) for a total size of 1.41 Gb, which is in the middle of the range of previous estimations for this species. In addition, protein-coding regions, including introns and flanking regions, are very well represented in the genome, as 95.2% of the 458 core eukaryotic genes and 98.8% of the 248 ultra-conserved subset were represented in the assembly and a total of 26 564 genes were annotated for future functional genomics studies. We performed a candidate gene analysis to compare three genes among all three freshwater eel species and, congruent with the phylogenetic relationships, Japanese eel (A. japanica) exhibited the most divergence. Overall, the sequenced genome presented in this study is a crucial addition to the presently available genetic tools to help guide future conservation efforts of freshwater eels.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".