Draft genome of the European medicinal leech Hirudo medicinalis (Annelida, Clitellata, Hirudiniformes) with emphasis on anticoagulants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The European medicinal leech has been used for medicinal purposes for millennia, and continues to be used today in modern hospital settings. Its utility is granted by the extremely potent anticoagulation factors that the leech secretes into the incision wound during feeding and, although a handful of studies have targeted certain anticoagulants, the full range of anticoagulation factors expressed by this species remains unknown. Here, we present the first draft genome of the European medicinal leech, Hirudo medicinalis, and estimate that we have sequenced between 79-94% of the full genome. Leveraging these data, we searched for anticoagulation factors across the genome of H. medicinalis. Following orthology determination through a series of BLAST searches, as well as phylogenetic analyses, we estimate that fully 15 different known anticoagulation factors are utilized by the species, and that 17 other proteins that have been linked to antihemostasis are also present in the genome. We underscore the utility of the draft genome for comparative studies of leeches and discuss our results in an evolutionary context.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
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".