MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993947491 · doi:10.1196/annals.1374.116

Automated Method Based in VNTR Analysis for Rickettsiae Genotyping

2006· article· en· W1993947491 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Liliana Vitorino, Rita de Sousa, Fátima Bacellar, Líbia Zé‐Zé

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicVector-borne infectious diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics
KeywordsGenotypingTypingAmpliconBiologyGeneticsComputational biologyElectropherogramIdentification (biology)Locus (genetics)Polymerase chain reactionGeneGenotypeElectrophoresis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A genetic locus named Rc-65, which is 5' adjacent to gene dksA and 3' adjacent to xerC gene, has previously been demonstrated to contain a VNTR with high discriminatory power in several rickettsial strains and thus, potentially useful for genetically similar strains identification. In this work, we present an automated molecular identification method based on capillary electrophoresis separation of VNTRs amplicons. The resulting electropherograms were in agreement with the sequence data obtained in a previous work. The presented genotyping method is fast and suitable for full automation, being a powerful tool for epidemiological surveillance in a large number of samples and enables the detection co-infected samples. The combination of other VNTR loci should improve the discriminatory capacity of this typing system, providing greater resolution and contributing to a more accurate VNTR-based assay. To our knowledge, this is the first automated assay for rickettsial strains identification.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the New York Academy of SciencesSame topicVector-borne infectious diseasesFrench-language works237,207