MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Transcriptional response of <i>Choristoneura fumiferana</i> to sublethal exposure of Cry1Ab protoxin from <i>Bacillus thuringiensis</i>

2006· article· en· W1997277487 on OpenAlexafffund
Liliane Meunier, Gabrielle Préfontaine, Manuella van Munster, Roland Brousseau, Luke Masson

Bibliographic record

VenueInsect Molecular Biology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInsect Resistance and Genetics
Canadian institutionsBiotechnology Research InstituteUniversité de Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBacillus thuringiensisBiologyChoristoneura fumiferanaGeneLarvaLepidoptera genitaliaBotanyBacteriaSpruce budwormGeneticsTortricidae

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bacillus thuringiensis is a microbial control agent active against Choristoneura fumiferana, a lepidopteran defoliator of North American forests. Although the B. thuringiensis insecticidal crystal protoxins have a relatively narrow host range, there is concern about their impact on non-target species where intoxication effects may not be overt. Larval toxicity effects can be assessed at the molecular level by determining altered transcriptional profiles in response to sublethal protoxin exposure in sensitive insects. Subtraction hybridization libraries were created using two larval populations, control and protoxin-fed and were characterized by sequencing 1091 clones. Differential mRNA expression of selected clones, as measured by quantitative polymerase chain reaction, identified a number of metabolic and stress-related genes that were either transcriptionally enhanced or repressed after protoxin exposure.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations30
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInsect Molecular BiologySame topicInsect Resistance and GeneticsFrench-language works237,207