Genome assembly of five Tephritid species for the enhancement of the Sterile Insect Technique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Tephritidae insect pests account for extensive crop damage and yield losses globally. Modern, sustainable pest management approaches are species-specific and, therefore, high-quality genome assemblies are required for their application. Here, we present chromosome-level assemblies for five members of the Tephritidae family: Anastrepha fraterculus, Anastrepha ludens, Bactrocera dorsalis, Bactrocera zonata and Zeugodacus cucurbitae . The assemblies used long read sequencing polished with short read sequencing and scaffolded using Hi-C (chromatin conformation capture) sequencing. Prior to scaffolding the assembly deduplication was performed to separate a primary assembly and an alternate assembly, and each was then scaffolded independently. The scaffolded assemblies reached N50 length in the range of 60Mb to 120Mb. The scaffolded assemblies were verified with BUSCO and completeness was in the range 97% to 98.5% and had very low duplicated, fragmented and missing orthologs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".