Rapid karyotypic evolution with high diploid number variation in a rare genus of bromeligenous frogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bromeligenous Crossodactylodes is a leptodactylid genus closely related to Paratelmatobius and Scythrophrys. The diploid number in all karyotyped species of these two latter genera is 24, which diverges from the modal diploid number (2n = 22) in the family. Here, we analyzed three species of Crossodactylodes and found karyotypes with 2n = 30, 2n = 32, and 2n = 36, diploid numbers that have not been reported in any other diploid leptodactylid species to date. Reconstruction of the ancestral chromosome number indicated that the diploid number changed from 22 to 24 in the common ancestor of Crossodactylodes, Paratelmatobius, and Scythrophrys, and that progressive increases in diploid number have occurred in Crossodactylodes. The large number of telocentric/subtelocentric chromosomes in karyotypes with higher diploid numbers raises the possibility that centric fissions may have occurred during the evolution of Paratelmatobiinae. Three metacentric chromosomes, probably involved in fission events, were inferred to be present in the common ancestor of all species of Crossodactylodes, but in C. bokermanni. Chromosome mapping of the satellite DNA PcP190 suggests homology between one arm of metacentric chromosome 1 of Crossodactylodes sp. 3 and telocentric chromosome 2 of C. itambe, supporting one of the presumed centric fission events.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".