The genome assembly of the westslope cutthroat trout, <i>Oncorhynchus lewisi</i>, reveals interspecific chromosomal rearrangements with the rainbow trout, <i>Oncorhynchus mykiss</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii) are popular among anglers throughout their native range along the West Coast and interior of North America. As they colonized the interior of North America, cutthroat trout diverged into several genetically distinct groups. Many of these groups are now threatened by habitat destruction, hybridization with rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), and competition from introduced species. These groups were previously classified as subspecies, but recent research suggests that they may represent distinct species. In this study, we produced a chromosomal-level genome assembly and a genetic map for one of the species in the cutthroat trout species complex, the westslope cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus lewisi-formerly Oncorhynchus clarkii lewisi). We also constructed haplotype-resolved assemblies from a westslope cutthroat-rainbow trout F1 hybrid. We used the new genome assemblies to identify major interspecific chromosomal rearrangements between the 2 sister species, including fusions, fissions, and inversions. These genome assemblies and chromosome data provide valuable insights regarding genetic variation within cutthroat trout and in hybrids between rainbow and cutthroat trout.
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 | 0.000 | 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".