MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1916523418 · doi:10.22621/cfn.v121i3.482

Recovery of DNA from Footprints in the Snow

2007· article· en· W1916523418 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Field-Naturalist · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinisterio de Ciencia y TecnologíaRoyal Society
KeywordsLagopusMitochondrial DNAFootprintForensic geneticsDNA profilingSnowDNATRACE (psycholinguistics)BiologyArcticMicrosatelliteZoologyGeographyEcologyGeneticsPaleontologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recovery of trace amounts of DNA has been demonstrated to be a reliable tool in conservation genetics and has become a key component of modern forensic casework. To date, genetic data have been successfully recovered from a variety of sources, including biological fluids, faeces, clothing, and even directly from fingerprints. However, to our knowledge and despite their widespread occurrence and clear potential as a source of DNA, genetic information has not previously been recovered directly from footprints. Here, we extract and amplify mitochondrial DNA from a snow footprint, <48-hours old, made by a Swedish Arctic Fox (Alopex lagopus). Our results demonstrate that it is possible to recover sufficient DNA from recent footprints to accurately type the source of the print, with implications for conservation biology and forensic science.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.297
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.193 · 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