MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2777460050 · doi:10.1080/23802359.2017.1419094

The complete mitochondrial genome of <i>Psychomantis borneensis</i> (Mantodea: Hymenopodidae)

2017· article· es· W2777460050 on OpenAlexaff
Leping Zhang, Yin-Yin Cai, Dan‐Na Yu, Kenneth B. Storey, Jia‐Yong Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueMitochondrial DNA Part B · 2017
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and Behavior
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Zhejiang ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBiologyPhylogenetic treeMitochondrial DNAGenomeMantisMonophylyGeneticsCladeEvolutionary biologyGenePopulationZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The complete mitochondrial genome of Psychomantis borneensis (Mantodea: Hymenopodidae) was successfully sequenced. The mitochondrial genome is found to be 15,493 bp long and is a circular molecule containing 37 genes (13 protein-coding genes, 22 tRNAs, and 2 rRNAs), typically found in other mantis mitochondrial genomes. The AT content of the whole genome was 72.4% and the length of the control region was 697 bp with 79.9% AT content. A phylogenetic tree was constructed based on the BI and ML analysis of 16 species of Mantodea. The results showed that P. borneensis was a sister clade to (Anaxarcha zhengi + Creobroter gemmata) (Hymenopodidae). The monophyly of the family Mantidae and the genus Theopompa, Hierodula, and Rhombodera were not supported. The outcome of this study will provide a useful data for population genetics studies as well as serve as a tool for better characterizing phylogenetic analysis of Mantodea.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 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

Citations11
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMitochondrial DNA Part BSame topicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207