MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1963982044 · doi:10.1080/02648725.2014.921501

Advances and applications of molecular cloning in clinical microbiology

2014· review· en· W1963982044 on OpenAlexaff
Kamal Sharma, Ajay Kumar Mishra, Vikram Mehraj, G Duraisamy

Bibliographic record

VenueBiotechnology and Genetic Engineering Reviews · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicBacteriophages and microbial interactions
Canadian institutionsMontreal Clinical Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecombinant DNAVirologyBiologyContext (archaeology)Molecular cloningMicrobiologyComputational biologyGeneGeneticsComplementary DNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Molecular cloning is based on isolation of a DNA sequence of interest to obtain multiple copies of it in vitro. Application of this technique has become an increasingly important tool in clinical microbiology due to its simplicity, cost effectiveness, rapidity, and reliability. This review entails the recent advances in molecular cloning and its application in the clinical microbiology in the context of polymicrobial infections, recombinant antigens, recombinant vaccines, diagnostic probes, antimicrobial peptides, and recombinant cytokines. Culture-based methods in polymicrobial infection have many limitation, which has been overcome by cloning techniques and provide gold standard technique. Recombinant antigens produced by cloning technique are now being used for screening of HIV, HCV, HBV, CMV, Treponema pallidum, and other clinical infectious agents. Recombinant vaccines for hepatitis B, cholera, influenza A, and other diseases also use recombinant antigens which have replaced the use of live vaccines and thus reduce the risk for adverse effects. Gene probes developed by gene cloning have many applications including in early diagnosis of hereditary diseases, forensic investigations, and routine diagnosis. Industrial application of this technology produces new antibiotics in the form of antimicrobial peptides and recombinant cytokines that can be used as therapeutic agents.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.615

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations15
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiotechnology and Genetic Engineering ReviewsSame topicBacteriophages and microbial interactionsFrench-language works237,207