A test of somatic mosaicism in the androgen receptor gene of Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The androgen receptor, an X-linked gene, has been widely studied in human populations because it contains highly polymorphic trinucleotide repeat motifs that have been associated with a number of adverse human health and behavioral effects. A previous study on the androgen receptor gene in carnivores reported somatic mosaicism in the tissues of a number of species including Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx). We investigated this claim in a closely related species, Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis). The presence of somatic mosaicism in lynx tissues could have implications for the future study of exonic trinucleotide repeats in landscape genomic studies, in which the accurate reporting of genotypes would be highly problematic. Methods To determine whether mosaicism occurs in Canada lynx, two lynx individuals were sampled for a variety of tissue types (lynx 1) and tissue locations (lynx 1 and 2), and 1,672 individuals of known sex were genotyped to further rule out mosaicism. Results We found no evidence of mosaicism in tissues from the two necropsied individuals, or any of our genotyped samples. Conclusions Our results indicate that mosaicism does not manifest in Canada lynx. Therefore, the use of hide samples for further work involving trinucleotide repeat polymorphisms in Canada lynx is warranted.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".