MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2795677215 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0195461

Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) genome and transcriptome

2018· article· en· W2795677215 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kris A. Christensen, Jong S. Leong, Dionne Sakhrani, Carlo A. Biagi, David R. Minkley, Ruth E. Withler, Éric Rondeau, Ben F. Koop, Robert H. Devlin

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersFisheries and Oceans CanadaCompute CanadaUniversity of VictoriaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsChinook windOncorhynchusHatcheryRainbow troutBiologyFisheryGenomeTroutEvolutionary biologyPopulationZoologyGeneticsFish <Actinopterygii>GeneDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When unifying genomic resources among studies and comparing data between species, there is often no better resource than a genome sequence. Having a reference genome for the Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) will enable the extensive genomic resources available for Pacific salmon, Atlantic salmon, and rainbow trout to be leveraged when asking questions related to the Chinook salmon. The Chinook salmon's wide distribution, long cultural impact, evolutionary history, substantial hatchery production, and recent wild-population decline make it an important research species. In this study, we sequenced and assembled the genome of a Chilliwack River Hatchery female Chinook salmon (gynogenetic and homozygous at all loci). With a reference genome sequence, new questions can be asked about the nature of this species, and its role in a rapidly changing world.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.320
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations119
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207