A Comparative Study of Genetic Diversity in Wild and Domestic Water Buffalo Populations
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Buffalo are important livestock animals, and their genetic diversity plays a key role in species evolution, farm production, and future breeding. Wild buffalo ( Bubalus arnee ) and domestic buffalo ( Bubalus bubalis ) show clear lineage differences and have a complex evolutionary history. Domestic buffalo are mainly divided into two groups: river type and swamp type. In this study, we used mitochondrial DNA, microsatellite markers, SNP data, and whole-genome sequencing to compare the genetic diversity of wild and domestic buffalo. Because of habitat loss and small population size, wild buffalo now show lower genetic diversity and stronger inbreeding. Domestic buffalo have been shaped by long-term human selection, so their population structure is different. River-type buffalo have been strongly selected for milk traits, while swamp-type buffalo still keep high geographic separation and more uniform physical features. Genomic analysis also shows clear signals of domestication and artificial selection, including several selection sweep regions. We also found gene flow at different levels between river and swamp types, and between domestic buffalo and wild buffalo. This study points out that protecting the wild buffalo gene pool is very important. It also suggests that breeding programs for domestic buffalo should maintain genetic diversity, make good use of genomic selection, and improve hybrid strategies. These results can support future buffalo breeding, resource management, and biodiversity conservation.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it