MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898168170 · doi:10.1016/j.dib.2018.10.070

Data for praying mantis mitochondrial genomes and phylogenetic constructions within Mantodea

2018· article· en· W2898168170 on OpenAlexaff
Leping Zhang, Dan‐Na Yu, Kenneth B. Storey, Hongyi Cheng, Jia‐Yong Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueData in Brief · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Zhejiang ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMantisPhylogenetic treeBiologyPhylogeneticsEvolutionary biologyZoologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this data article, we provide five datasets of mantis mitochondrial genomes: (1) PCG123: nucleotide sequences of 13 protein-coding genes including all codon positions; (2) PCG123R: nucleotide sequences of two rRNAs and 13 protein-coding genes including all codon positions; (3) PCG12: nucleotide sequences of 13 protein-coding genes without third codon positions; (4) PCG12R: nucleotide sequences of two rRNAs and 13 protein-coding genes without third codon positions, and (5) PCGAA: amino acid sequences of 13 protein-coding genes. These were used to construct phylogenetic relationships within Mantodea and the phylogenetic trees inferred from Bayesian analysis using two data sets (PCG12R, PCGAA) and Maximum Likelihood analysis using four data sets (PCG123, PCG12, PCG12R and PCGAA). We also provide initiation codon, termination codon, amino acid length and nucleotide diversity (Pi) of protein-coding genes among 27 mantises. The whole mitochondrial genomes of 27 praying mantises were submitted to GenBank with the accession numbers KY689112-KY689138.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.553
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 science0.0010.001
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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.152 · 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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueData in BriefSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207