MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2967802450 · doi:10.1266/ggs.19-00013

Centromere localization in medaka fish based on half-tetrad analysis

2019· article· en· W2967802450 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Masahiro Furuyama, Haruna Nagaoka, Tadashi Sato, Mitsuru Sakaizumi

Bibliographic record

VenueGenes & Genetic Systems · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicChromosomal and Genetic Variations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of Genetics
KeywordsCentromereBiologyGenomeOryziasChromosomeGeneticsTakifugu rubripesFish <Actinopterygii>GeneVertebrateEvolutionary biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gene-centromere (G-C) mapping provides insight into vertebrate genome composition, structure and evolution. Although medaka fish are important experimental animals, no genome-wide G-C map of medaka has been constructed. In this study, we used 112 interspecific triploid hybrids and 152 DNA markers to make G-C maps of all 24 linkage groups (LGs). Under the assumption of 50% interference, 24 centromeres were localized onto all corresponding medaka LGs. Comparison with 21 centromere positions deduced from putative centromeric repeats revealed that 19 were localized inside the centromeric regions of the G-C maps, whereas two were not. Based on the centromere positions indicated in the G-C maps and those of centromeric repeats on each LG, we classified chromosomes as either biarmed or monoarmed; n = 24 = 10 metacentrics/submetacentrics + 14 subtelocentrics/acrocentrics, which is consistent with the results of previous karyological reports. This study helps to elucidate genome evolution mechanisms, and integrates physical and genetic maps with karyological information of medaka.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenes & Genetic SystemsSame topicChromosomal and Genetic VariationsFrench-language works237,207