MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3041682789 · doi:10.1038/s42003-020-1094-y

Mandarin fish (Sinipercidae) genomes provide insights into innate predatory feeding

2020· article· en· W3041682789 on OpenAlexaff
Shan He, Ling Li, Liyuan Lv, Wenjing Cai, Yaqi Dou, Jiao Li, Shulin Tang, Xu Chen, Zhen Zhang, Jing Xu, Yanpeng Zhang, Zhan Yin, Sven Wuertz, Ya‐Xiong Tao, Heiner Kuhl, Xu‐Fang Liang

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications Biology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Agriculture
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsBiologyPredationZoologyGenomeFish <Actinopterygii>Evolutionary biologyGeneEcologyGeneticsFishery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mandarin fishes (Sinipercidae) are piscivores that feed solely on live fry. Unlike higher vertebrates, teleosts exhibit feeding behavior driven mainly by genetic responses, with no modification by learning from parents. Mandarin fishes could serve as excellent model organisms for studying feeding behavior. We report a long-read, chromosomal-scale genome assembly for Siniperca chuatsi and genome assemblies for Siniperca kneri, Siniperca scherzeri and Coreoperca whiteheadi. Positive selection analysis revealed rapid adaptive evolution of genes related to predatory feeding/aggression, growth, pyloric caeca and euryhalinity. Very few gill rakers are observed in mandarin fishes; analogously, we found that zebrafish deficient in edar had a gill raker loss phenotype and a more predatory habit, with reduced intake of zooplankton but increased intake of prey fish. Higher expression of bmp4, which could inhibit edar expression and gill raker development through binding of a Xvent-1 site upstream of edar, may cause predatory feeding in Siniperca.

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 score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations86
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications BiologySame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207