{"id":"W2794161124","doi":"10.1038/s41598-018-23052-8","title":"Environmental DNA filtration techniques affect recovered biodiversity","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Scientific Reports","topic":"Environmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies","field":"Environmental Science","cited_by":176,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Guelph","funders":"Miljødirektoratet; Norges Forskningsråd","keywords":"Filtration (mathematics); Environmental DNA; Filter (signal processing); Biodiversity; Cellulose; Environmental science; Lysis; Water quality; Composition (language); Pulp and paper industry; Environmental engineering; Biology; Ecology; Computer science; Mathematics; Engineering; Biochemistry","routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":false},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0007093456,0.0002111339,0.0001593693,0.00007082539,0.001210624,0.0001263359,0.0002517965,0.00009570028,0.006937569],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00004241142,0.0002083064,0.0001080918,0.0002618976,0.002289191,0.00053855,0.0006538166,0.00009672208,0.004684267],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0004664969,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000004640799,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0001022298,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00005179894,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9975833,0.00005928512,0.0002682779,0.0009916927,0.0007140521,0.000383362],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9988949,0.00002014208,0.0002188262,0.0007272323,0.000005184988,0.0001337452],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"bench_or_experimental","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00001022002,0.0001073087,0.5724269,0.000002439132,0.00001278143,0.00006915952,0.0003550992,0.000001813571,0.2745266,9.309003e-7,0.1491838,0.003303009],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00009619578,0.000161471,0.3515486,0.000008718643,0.00003111066,0.00008042176,0.0002049074,0.00001006914,0.4801358,0.0006143224,0.166742,0.0003664251],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9849824,0.00001508405,0.00006334149,0.0001121614,0.002150337,0.0004196605,0.00003348851,0.0001518667,0.01207168],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9932055,0.00001210269,0.004009045,0.0001365184,0.00006249886,0.00001028979,0.00009318473,0.000007655278,0.00246319],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.2208782,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9960907,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.01215559141954425,"score_gpt":0.2068734505854474,"score_spread":0.1947178591659031,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}