MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A first generation Atlantic halibut <i>Hippoglossus hippoglossus </i>(L.) microarray: application to developmental studies

2008· article· en· W1992763415 on OpenAlexaff
Susan E. Douglas, Leah C. Knickle, Jason B. Williams, Robert M Flight, Michael Reith

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fish Biology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMolecular Biology Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Marine BiosciencesDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHippoglossus hippoglossusHalibutBiologyGenBankExpressed sequence tagGeneGeneticsKEGGMicroarrayGene expression profilingMicroarray analysis techniquesGene expressionComputational biologyTranscriptomeFishery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An oligonucleotide microarray containing 50‐mer oligonucleotides representing 9277 unique Atlantic halibut Hippoglossus hippoglossus genes has been designed, printed and is currently being used for the study of gene expression in developing halibut. The oligonucleotides are based on all the Atlantic halibut data available at the time of printing, these included expressed sequence tags (ESTs) and complete cDNAs derived from the Pleurogene sequencing project as well as sequences deposited in GenBank by other groups as of September 2006. Of the Pleurogene ESTs, 5040 are functionally annotated; the remainder are unknown (1016) or are similar to unannotated sequences in GenBank (1626). In addition to Atlantic halibut features, several control features have been incorporated, including an oligonucleotide representing a heterologous plant gene (92 spots) and empty spots containing buffer only (1344). The array contains 48 subgrids, each comprised of 32 columns and 26 rows. Every feature is printed at least four times as side‐by‐side quadruplicates, resulting in a microarray containing 39 936 features. This microarray has been utilized to identify genes differentially expressed in larval Atlantic halibut during the developmental period from post‐hatch to post‐metamorphosis. Early in development, transcription of the gene for hatching enzyme was down‐regulated, whereas a gene involved in eye development was up‐regulated. Midway to metamorphosis, transcription of genes encoding several key digestive enzymes was up‐regulated, and in pre‐metamorphic larvae, transcription of genes encoding muscle proteins was prominent.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.510
Threshold uncertainty score0.665

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations38
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fish BiologySame topicMolecular Biology Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207