MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384205039 · doi:10.1101/gr.277936.123

Extensive variation in germline de novo mutations in <i>Poecilia reticulata</i>

2023· article· en· W4384205039 on OpenAlexafffund
Yuying Lin, Iulia Darolti, Wouter van der Bijl, Jake Morris, Judith E. Mank

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsBiologyPoeciliaGuppyGermlineMutation rateGeneticsMutationGermline mutationMutation AccumulationAdaptation (eye)Evolutionary biologyGenetic variationGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rate of germline mutation is fundamental to evolutionary processes, as it generates the variation upon which selection acts. The guppy, Poecilia reticulata , is a model of rapid adaptation, however the relative contribution of standing genetic variation versus de novo mutation (DNM) to evolution in this species remains unclear. Here, we use pedigree-based approaches to quantify and characterize germline DNMs in three large guppy families. Our results suggest germline mutation rate in the guppy varies substantially across individuals and families. Most DNMs are shared across multiple siblings, suggesting they arose during early embryonic development. DNMs are randomly distributed throughout the genome, and male-biased mutation rate is low, as would be expected from the short guppy generation time. Overall, our study shows remarkable variation in germline mutation rate and provides insights into rapid evolution of guppies.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.331 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenome ResearchSame topicEvolution and Genetic DynamicsFrench-language works237,207