MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416097088 · doi:10.1093/gbe/evaf210

A Chromosome-level Genome Assembly of the Western Nose-Horned Viper ( <i>Vipera ammodytes ammodytes</i> )

2025· article· en· W4416097088 on OpenAlexaff
Weiqiao Rao, Esperanza Rivera‐de‐Torre, Lorenzo Seneci, Yaolei Zhang, Tianming Lan, Jože Pungerčar, Siqi Liu, Andreas H. Laustsen

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome Biology and Evolution · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicVenomous Animal Envenomation and Studies
Canadian institutionsIONICS Mass Spectrometry (Canada)
FundersH2020 European Research CouncilJavna Agencija za Raziskovalno Dejavnost RSEuropean Commission
KeywordsVIPeRContigSequence assemblyGenomeViper VenomsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a chromosome-level genome assembly of the western nose-horned viper (Vipera ammodytes ammodytes), the most medically important viper in Europe. Using PacBio Sequel and Illumina HiSeq X Ten sequencing, we generated ∼270 Gb of data, achieving ∼131× coverage of the genome. The final assembly spans 1.55 Gb with a contig N50 of 45.9 Mb and a scaffold N50 of 210 Mb, anchored into 18 pseudo-chromosomes. Completeness was supported by recovery of 97.1% of Vertebrata BUSCOs. A total of 20,775 protein-coding genes were predicted, of which 96.6% were functionally annotated. Repetitive sequences accounted for 53.75% of the genome, dominated by LINEs (41.87%) and LTRs (14.35%). We identified 112 venom-related genes across 15 families, with expansions in SVMPs, Snaclecs, sPLA₂s, SPIs, and SVSPs, together comprising 62.5% of the venom repertoire. Chemosensory genes were also expanded, including 448 olfactory receptors, 72 taste receptors, and 29 vomeronasal receptors. This assembly represents the most complete genome resource for a true viper to date and provides a key resource for investigating venom evolution, chemosensory adaptation, and comparative snake genomics.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score0.532

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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 venueGenome Biology and EvolutionSame topicVenomous Animal Envenomation and StudiesFrench-language works237,207