MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996746582 · doi:10.1139/g05-118

Expressed sequence tag analysis in tef (<i>Eragrostis tef</i>(Zucc) Trotter)

2006· article· en· W1996746582 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ju‐Kyung Yu, Qi Sun, Mauricio La Rota, Hugh Edwards, Hailu Tefera, Mark E. Sorrells

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWheat and Barley Genetics and Pathology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcKnight Foundation
KeywordsBiologyEragrostisGeneticsExpressed sequence tagIndelSingle-nucleotide polymorphismGenetic markerGeneComplementary DNABotanyGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tef (Eragrostis tef (Zucc.) Trotter) is the most important cereal crop in Ethiopia; however, there is very little DNA sequence information available for this species. Expressed sequence tags (ESTs) were generated from 4 cDNA libraries: seedling leaf, seedling root, and inflorescence of E. tef and seedling leaf of Eragrostis pilosa, a wild relative of E. tef. Clustering of 3603 sequences produced 530 clusters and 1890 singletons, resulting in 2420 tef unigenes. Approximately 3/4 of tef unigenes matched protein or nucleotide sequences in public databases. Annotation of unigenes associated 68% of the putative tef genes with gene ontology categories. Identification of the translated unigenes for conserved protein domains revealed 389 protein family domains (Pfam), the most frequent of which was protein kinase. A total of 170 ESTs containing simple sequence repeats (EST-SSRs) were identified and 80 EST-SSR markers were developed. In addition, 19 single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) and (or) insertion-deletion (indel) and 34 intron fragment length polymorphism (IFLP) markers were developed. The EST database and molecular markers generated in this study will be valuable resources for further tef genetic research.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.621

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations39
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicWheat and Barley Genetics and PathologyFrench-language works237,207