MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415721789 · doi:10.5376/ija.2025.15.0022

Genetic Basis of Growth Traits in Shrimp Based on QTL and GWAS Studies

2025· article· W4415721789 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Linhua Zhang, Shiying Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Aquaculture · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShrimpQuantitative trait locusTraitGenome-wide association studyShrimp farmingGenetic associationMolecular breedingAssociation mapping

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Shrimps are an important part of global aquaculture, especially South American white shrimp and other varieties dominate the global aquatic supply, and their output accounts for more than half of the world's total crustacean production. Growth traits (such as body length, weight, etc.) are directly related to breeding yield and economic benefits, and are one of the core goals of aquatic breeding. In recent years, molecular genetic technologies such as quantitative trait locus (QTL) localization and genome-wide association analysis (GWAS) have made progress in the field of aquatic products and have been gradually applied to shrimp genetic breeding research. This study reviews the main growth traits of shrimp and their biological mechanisms, reviews the current application status of QTL localization and GWAS in the study of growth traits of shrimp, summarizes the research progress of key molecular markers and candidate genes, and discusses the combination of traditional breeding and molecular assistive means using Chinese shrimp as an example. Finally, future strategies and international cooperation in shrimp molecular breeding are expected.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of AquacultureSame topicGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and AnimalsFrench-language works237,207