MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2550462889 · doi:10.1038/sdata.2016.97

A variant reference data set for the Africanized honeybee, Apis mellifera

2016· article· en· W2550462889 on OpenAlexafffund
Samir Moura Kadri, Brock A. Harpur, Ricardo de Oliveira Orsi, Amro Zayed

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Data · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São PauloYork University
KeywordsBiologySNPBeekeepingPopulationSingle-nucleotide polymorphismHoney beeEvolutionary biologyPopulation geneticsGeneticsZoologyEcologyGeneGenotypeDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Africanized honeybee (AHB) is a population of Apis mellifera found in the Americas. AHBs originated in 1956 in Rio Clara, Brazil where imported African A. m. scutellata escaped and hybridized with local populations of European A. mellifera. Africanized populations can now be found from Northern Argentina to the Southern United States. AHBs-often referred to as 'Killer Bees'- are a major concern to the beekeeping industry as well as a model for the evolutionary genetics of colony defence. We performed high coverage pooled-resequencing of 360 diploid workers from 30 Brazilian AHB colonies using Illumina Hi-Seq (150 bp PE). This yielded a high density SNP data set with an average read depth at each site of 20.25 reads. With 3,606,720 SNPs and 155,336 SNPs within 11,365 genes, this data set is the largest genomic resource available for AHBs and will enable high-resolution studies of the population dynamics, evolution, and genetics of this successful biological invader, in addition to facilitating the development of SNP-based tools for identifying AHBs.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.791
Threshold uncertainty score0.720

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0040.002
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 head0.401
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.106 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations30
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific DataSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207