MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280573430 · doi:10.1139/cjas-2020-0170

Single nucleotide polymorphisms in the 3′ UTR of follistatin-like 4 and scavenger receptor class B member 1 are associated with Dazu black goat litter size

2022· article· en· W4280573430 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jiyuan Zhu, E Guangxin, Jiabo Wang, Shanshan Xu, Xiuqin Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Animal Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSingle-nucleotide polymorphismSNPBiologyLitterGenotypeGeneticsFollistatinGeneMolecular biologyAndrologyEndocrinologyMedicineEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The untranslated regions (UTRs) of genes play crucial roles in regulating gene expression at the post-transcriptional level such as affecting mRNA stabilization. In this study, 26 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and one deletion located in UTR were genotyped from 186 Dazu black goats via SNaPshot, and the correlation between genotype and litter size was analyzed. The results indicated that two SNP loci, SNP_chr17-20182525 and SNP_chr7-65652612, which were located at the 3′ UTR of scavenger receptor class B member 1 and follistatin-like 4, were significantly ( P < 0.05) correlated with the litter size of first parity goats. SNP_chr7-65652612 was also significantly associated with the total litter size of first and second parity offspring ( P < 0.05). In conclusion, SNP_chr7-65652612 and SNP_chr17-20182525 have correlation with the litter size of Dazu black goat and they are potential genetic markers for litter size breeding.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Animal ScienceSame topicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestockFrench-language works237,207