MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6939925456 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.c.7826193

Supplementary material from "Exploration of gene presence/absence variations in Oncorhynchus mykiss and their differentiation between wild and selection population"

2025· other· en· W6939925456 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRainbow troutSelection (genetic algorithm)GenePhylogenetic treeCandidate geneGenomeIdentification (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gene presence/absence variations (PAVs) have been considered as the important determinants of genome evolution and phenotypic diversity. However, studies on gene PAVs have been poorly documented, especially in fishes. In the present study, pan-genome of rainbow trout was constructed based on 268 whole-genome re-sequencing accessions (4.38 Tb data). It recovered additional 62Mb sequences and 1288 protein-coding genes. Then, 9,831(22.77%) gene PAVs were genotyped across the 268 individuals. PAV-based PCA analysis, together with phylogenetic topology and STRUCTURE, revealed the clear separation among the different wild and selection populations. Additionally, PAV-based GWAS has identified 3 candidate PAVs significantly associated with artificial selection. Meanwhile, Fst analysis revealed the 35 PAVs with significant frequency differences between wild and selection populations in Canada, while 15 candidate PAVs were detected between the populations in America. Their biological functions have been reported to participate in the regulation of growth performance and stress response. The present study would deepen our understanding of widespread gene PAVs and facilitate the identification of key candidates that contribute to important traits.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.834
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0630.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.237 · 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.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareFrench-language works237,207