MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1726674412 · doi:10.5539/ijb.v7n4p42

Discovery of Highly Accurate Plant DNA Barcodes via Novel Iterative Methodologies

2015· article· en· W1726674412 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jaison Jain

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Biology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicIdentification and Quantification in Food
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBarcodeDNA barcodingGenomeIdentification (biology)Computational biologyChloroplast DNABiologyBiodiversityDNAEnvironmental DNAComputer scienceEvolutionary biologyGeneticsEcologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A DNA barcode is a short, variable segment of DNA used in species identification. A rapid and inexpensive molecular tool, DNA barcoding may allow for large-scale biodiversity assessments in the future, prompting logical and targeted conservation policies. However, a highly accurate DNA barcode for plants has not yet been found, hindering development of advanced DNA barcoding-based conservation paradigms and perpetuating loss of plant biodiversity. Previous attempts to develop a plant barcode have examined only small fractions of the plant genome. In this study, a more rigorous methodology was devised: whole plant chloroplast genomes were iteratively analyzed in successive 500 base pair segments, such that all potential barcodes contained within the chloroplast genome were assessed for their ability to distinguish plants. Moreover, an algorithm was constructed to optimize this novel process, yielding a 17000% increase in efficiency. Both non-optimized and optimized methods uncovered two 500 bp regions of DNA (out of the 2950 tested) that had unprecedented, near-perfect identification accuracy in a comprehensive sample set of whole chloroplast sequences. These DNA barcodes may enable larger biodiversity assessments, aiding plant species preservation efforts. And, our algorithm may facilitate discovery of barcodes for other kingdoms of life, expanding the reach of our methodology.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.278
Threshold uncertainty score0.287

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.271 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of BiologySame topicIdentification and Quantification in FoodFrench-language works237,207