MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975726686 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2014-0526

Development of a sandwich hybridization assay for the identification and quantification of red drum (<i>Sciaenops ocellatus</i>) eggs: a novel tool for fishery research and management

2015· article· en· W1975726686 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rebecca Mortensen, Stephen A. Arnott, William J. Jones, Dianne I. Greenfield

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicIdentification and Quantification in Food
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSouth Carolina Sea Grant Consortium
KeywordsBiologyRibosomal RNAZoologyFisheryBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Egg identification and quantification are crucial to understanding the spawning and recruitment dynamics of economically important fish species. This study describes the development of a novel molecular method for finfish egg identification that eliminates the need for time-consuming microscopy. Sandwich hybridization assay (SHA) uses two ribosomal RNA (rRNA)-targeted oligonucleotides to directly detect unpurified and unamplified rRNA. Probes were designed to complement the internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region of the red drum (Sciaenops ocellatus), an important recreational game fish for which spawning and reproductive information is sparse. Sample homogenization procedures were modified to disrupt egg chorion, and the resultant assay detected S. ocellatus eggs and tissues without cross-reactivity. Standard curves were linear (y 450 = 0.001x + 0.054; R 2 = 0.999), showing potential for quantitative uses, and the lower limit of detection was 5 eggs·mL −1 homogenate. Ontogenetic stage had a significant effect (ANOVA, p &lt; 0.05) on optical density. The assay successfully detected S.ocellatus eggs in field samples from Charleston Harbor, South Carolina, and could be incorporated into current management practices or adapted to other species.

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)0.003
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 score0.320
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicIdentification and Quantification in FoodFrench-language works237,207