MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009329677 · doi:10.1139/g06-113

Construction and characterization of the first bacterial artificial chromosome library for the cotton species Gossypium barbadense L.

2006· article· en· W2009329677 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xinyue Wang, Jun Ma, W.S. Wang, Yakun Zheng, G.Y. Zhang, China Liu, Zhiying Ma

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicResearch in Cotton Cultivation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHebei Agricultural UniversityAgricultural University of Hebei ProvinceChinese Academy of Agricultural SciencesChinese Academy of SciencesNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGossypium barbadenseBacterial artificial chromosomeBiologyGossypiumLocus (genetics)Genomic libraryGeneticsGenomeChromosomeBotanyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the second most widely cultivated cotton, Gossypium barbadense is well known for its superior fiber properties and its high levels of resistance to Fusarium and Verticillium wilts. To enhance our ability to exploit these properties in breeding programs, we constructed the first bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) library for this species. The library contains 167 424 clones (49 920 BamHI and 117 504 HindIII clones), with an estimated average insert size of 130 kb. About 94.0% of the clones had inserts over 100 kb, and the empty clones accounted for less than 4.0%. Contamination of the library with chloroplast clones was very low (0.2%). Screening the library with locus-specific probes showed that BAC clones represent 6.5-fold genome equivalents. This high-quality library provides an additional asset with which to exploit genetic variation for cotton improvement.

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)0.001
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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations34
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicResearch in Cotton CultivationFrench-language works237,207