Establishment and genetic characterization of zebrafish RW line
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Zebrafish have emerged as an alternative vertebrate model for both basic and applied science. While two zebrafish lines, AB and TU, have been extensively used, recent studies suggest that complex behaviors and susceptibility to adult phenotypes vary among lines. Given the increasing demand across diverse research fields, establishing a phylogenetically distinct wild-type zebrafish line without deleterious genetic variants would greatly benefit the research community. In this study, we documented the establishment of the RIKEN Wild-type (RW) line and conducted comparative genome analyses to investigate the genetic characteristics of various wild-type zebrafish lines such as AB, TU, TL, WIK, SAT, NHGRI-1, PET, *AB, IND, M-AB and IM with a particular focus on the genetic characterization of the RW line. We identified numerous genetic variants in each line that may affect coding proteins, some of which are unique to each line, conferring specific genetic traits. Notably, the RW line was found to carry such genetic variants in 13 genes. Furthermore, our phylogenetic analysis revealed that the RW line is genetically distinct from other commonly used lines. Collectively, the RW line is a robust zebrafish line with excellent breeding characteristics, making it valuable for studies exploring genetic diversity and line-specific traits within the species.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".