Chromosome-Scale Genomes of the Flightless Caterpillar Hunter Beetles <i>Calosoma tepidum</i> and <i>Calosoma wilkesii</i> From British Columbia (Coleoptera: Carabidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The giant ground beetle genus Calosoma (Coleoptera, Carabidae) comprises ca. 120 species distributed worldwide. About half of the species in this genus are flightless due to a process of wing reduction likely resulting from the colonization of remote habitats such as oceanic islands, highlands, and deserts. This clade is emerging as a new model to study the genomic basis of wing evolution in insects. In this framework, we present the de novo assemblies and annotations of two Calosoma species genomes from British Columbia, Calosoma tepidum and Calosoma wilkesii. Combining PacBio HiFi and Hi-C sequencing, we produce high-quality reference genomes for these two species. Our annotation using long-read RNAseq and existing Coleoptera protein evidence identified a total of 21,976 genes for C. tepidum and 26,814 genes for C. wilkesii. Using synteny analyses, we provide an in-depth comparison of genomic architectures in these two species. We infer an overall pattern of chromosome-scale conservation between the two species, with only minor rearrangements within chromosomes. These new reference genomes represent a major step forward in the study of this group, providing high-quality references that open the door to different approaches such as comparative genomics or population scale resequencing to study the implications of flight evolution.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".