Chromosome painting of the red-handed tamarin (<i>Saguinus midas</i>) compared to other Callitrichinae monkeys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Here we present, for the first time, the complete chromosome painting map of Saguinus midas, the red-handed tamarin. Chromosome banding and painting with human chromosome-specific probes were used to compare the karyotype of this species with those of four other Neotropical primates of the subfamily Callitrichinae: Leontopithecus rosalia, Callithrix geoffroyi, C. penicillata, and Mico argentatus. The chromosome painting map of S. midas was identical to that of L. rosalia and other previously studied tamarin species (genera Saguinus and Leontopithecus). The three marmoset species studied (genera Callithrix and Mico) differed in the painting pattern of four human probes (chromosomes 1, 2, 10, and 16). These paints identified the presence or absence of chromosome associations HSA 1/10 and 2/16 in these taxa. By integrating our data with those from the literature, we were able to propose an ancestral Callitrichinae karyotype. The genera Saguinus and Leontopithecus (tamarins) conserve the ancestral Callitrichinae karyotype, while Mico and Callithrix (marmosets) show more derived karyotypes due to chromosome translocations and fissions that occurred during the evolution of these taxa.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".