Karyotype differentiation in the Nothobranchius ugandensis species group (Teleostei, Cyprinodontiformes), seasonal fishes from the east African inland plateau, in the context of phylogeny and biogeography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The karyotype differentiation of the twelve known members of the Nothobranchius ugandensis Wildekamp, 1994 species group is reviewed and the karyotype composition of seven of its species is described herein for the first time using a conventional cytogenetic protocol. Changes in the architecture of eukaryotic genomes often have a major impact on processes underlying reproductive isolation, adaptation and diversification. African annual killifishes of the genus Nothobranchius Peters, 1868 (Teleostei: Nothobranchiidae), which are adapted to an extreme environment of ephemeral wetland pools in African savannahs, feature extensive karyotype evolution in small, isolated populations and thus are suitable models for studying the interplay between karyotype change and species evolution. The present investigation reveals a highly conserved diploid chromosome number (2n = 36) but a variable number of chromosomal arms (46–64) among members of the N. ugandensis species group, implying a significant role of pericentric inversions and/or other types of centromeric shift in the karyotype evolution of the group. When superimposed onto a phylogenetic tree based on molecular analyses of two mitochondrial genes the cytogenetic characteristics did not show any correlation with the phylogenetic relationships within the lineage. While karyotypes of many other Nothobranchius spp. studied to date diversified mainly via chromosome fusions and fissions, the N. ugandensis species group maintains stable 2n and the karyotype differentiation seems to be constrained to intrachromosomal rearrangements. Possible reasons for this difference in the trajectory of karyotype differentiation are discussed. While genetic drift seems to be a major factor in the fixation of chromosome rearrangements in Nothobranchius, future studies are needed to assess the impact of predicted multiple inversions on the genome evolution and species diversification within the N. ugandensis species group.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".