MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6962658242 · doi:10.17895/ices.pub.25635870

Microsatellite Dna Variation In Reared Strains Of Turbot (Scophthalmus Maximus) And Atlantic Halibut (Hippoglossus Hippoglossus) Compared With Wild Samples

2001· other· en· W6962658242 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) · 2001
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbotHalibutScophthalmusMicrosatelliteBroodstockGenetic variationHippoglossus hippoglossusStrain (injury)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

No abstracts are to be cited without prior reference to the author.Separate sets of six polymorphic microsatellite DNA loci were chosen to screen three samples of wild caught fish and reared strains of turbot (Scophthalmus maximus) and three samples of wild caught broodstock of Atlantic halibut (Hippoglossus hippoglossus) and their progeny. For both species, the reared samples were F1 progeny of wild caught broodstock. Pairwise comparison using Fisher’s exact test and the FST estimator showed significant differences between reared samples of turbot and its geographical nearest wild sample, while for halibut, significant difference was found between all broodstock-strain pairs. Significant reduction in genetic variability in the reared strains of turbot compared with the geographical nearest wild sample, in terms of number of alleles and heterozygosity, was found in the strains from French and Isle of Man hatcheries, while no such reduction was found in the strain from Norwegian hatchery. For halibut, reduction was found in the strains from Canadian and Icelandic hatcheries, while, as for turbot, not in the Norwegian strain. It is argued that low effective number of breeders (Ne) in the French and the Isle of Man turbot hatcheries and the Canadian and the Icelandic halibut hatcheries may have caused reduced genetic variability in these strains.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.152 · 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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES)French-language works237,207