Draft assembly and annotation of the Cuban crocodile (Crocodylus rhombifer) genome
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The new data provide an important genomic resource for the Critically Endangered Cuban crocodile (Crocodylus rhombifer). Cuban crocodiles are restricted to the Zapata Swamp in southern Matanzas Province, Cuba, and readily hybridize with the widespread American crocodile (Crocodylus acutus) in areas of sympatry. The reported de novo assembly will contribute to studies of crocodylian evolutionary history and provide a resource for informing Cuban crocodile conservation. DATA DESCRIPTION: The final 2.2 Gb draft genome for C. rhombifer consists of 41,387 scaffolds (contigs: N50 = 104.67 Kb; scaffold: N50-518.55 Kb). Benchmarking Universal Single-Copy Orthologs (BUSCO) identified 92.3% of the 3,354 genes in the vertebrata_odb10 database. Approximately 42% of the genome (960Mbp) comprises repeat elements. We predicted 30,138 unique protein-coding sequences (17,737 unique genes) in the genome assembly. Functional annotation found the top Gene Ontology annotations for Biological Processes, Molecular Function, and Cellular Component were regulation, protein, and intracellular, respectively. This assembly will support future macroevolutionary, conservation, and molecular studies of the Cuban crocodile.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it