MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2971528009 · doi:10.7717/peerj.7633

The complete mitochondrial genomes of five longicorn beetles (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) and phylogenetic relationships within Cerambycidae

2019· article· en· W2971528009 on OpenAlexaff
Jun Wang, Xin-Yi Dai, Xiao-Dong Xu, Zi-Yi Zhang, Dan‐Na Yu, Kenneth B. Storey, Jia‐Yong Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenuePeerJ · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Zhejiang ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsLonghorn beetleBiologyPhylogenetic treeMonophylyIntergenic regionPhylogeneticsEvolutionary biologyGeneticsMitochondrial DNASubfamilyGenomeGeneZoologyClade

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cerambycidae is one of the most diversified groups within Coleoptera and includes nearly 35,000 known species. The relationships at the subfamily level within Cerambycidae have not been convincingly demonstrated and the gene rearrangement of mitochondrial genomes in Cerambycidae remains unclear due to the low numbers of sequenced mitogenomes. In the present study, we determined five complete mitogenomes of Cerambycidae and investigated the phylogenetic relationship among the subfamilies of Cerambycidae based on mitogenomes. The mitogenomic arrangement of all five species was identical to the ancestral Cerambycidae type without gene rearrangement. Remarkably, however, two large intergenic spacers were detected in the mitogenome of Pterolophia sp. ZJY-2019. The origins of these intergenic spacers could be explained by the slipped-strand mispairing and duplication/random loss models. A conserved motif was found between trnS2 and nad1 gene, which was proposed to be a binding site of a transcription termination peptide. Also, tandem repeat units were identified in the A + T-rich region of all five mitogenomes. The monophyly of Lamiinae and Prioninae was strongly supported by both MrBayes and RAxML analyses based on nucleotide datasets, whereas the Cerambycinae and Lepturinae were recovered as non-monophyletic.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Bench or experimentalhigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.820
Threshold uncertainty score0.598

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designObservational · Bench 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

Citations44
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeerJSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207