MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2759467358 · doi:10.1139/gen-2017-0016

Detection of breed-specific copy number variations in domestic chicken genome

2017· article· en· W2759467358 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Saeed S. Sohrabi, Mohammadreza Mohammadabadi, Dong‐Dong Wu, Ali Esmailizadeh

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyCopy-number variationQuantitative trait locusGeneticsGenomePhenotypic traitGeneBreedPhenotypeGenomicsComputational biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Copy number variations (CNVs) are important large-scale variants. They are widespread in the genome and may contribute to phenotypic variation. Detection and characterization of CNVs can provide new insights into the genetic basis of important traits. Here, we perform whole-genome short read sequence analysis to identify CNVs in two indigenous and commercial chicken breeds to evaluate the impact of the identified CNVs on breed-specific traits. After filtration, a total of 12 955 CNVs spanning (on average) about 9.42% of the chicken genome were found that made up 5467 CNV regions (CNVRs). Chicken quantitative trait loci (QTL) datasets and Ensembl gene annotations were used as resources for the estimation of potential phenotypic effects of our CNVRs on breed-specific traits. In total, 34% of our detected CNVRs were also detected in earlier CNV studies. These CNVRs partly overlap several previously reported QTL and gene ontology terms associated with some important traits, including shank length QTL in Creeper-specific CNVRs and body weight and egg production characteristics, as well as muscle and body organ growth, in the Arian commercial breed. Our findings provide new insights into the genomic structure of the chicken genome for an improved understanding of the potential roles of CNVRs in differentiating between breeds or lines.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score0.496

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations46
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalitiesFrench-language works237,207