MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017799823 · doi:10.1002/elps.200405957

An integrated method for mutation detection using on‐chip sample preparation, single‐stranded conformation polymorphism, and heteroduplex analysis

2004· article· en· W2017799823 on OpenAlexaff
Golnaz Vahedi, Karan Kaler, C. Backhouse

Bibliographic record

VenueElectrophoresis · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrofluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeteroduplexSingle-strand conformation polymorphismDNAMolecular biologyGenotypingPolymerase chain reactionMutationBiologyGeneticsGeneGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work integrates rapid techniques for mutation detection by producing single-stranded DNA and (renatured) double-stranded DNA on-chip, labeling these with fluorescent DNA stains and then performing two complementary methods of mutation detection-single stranded conformation polymorphism (SSCP) analysis and heteroduplex analysis (HA). This involves the denaturation of double-stranded polymerase chain reaction (PCR) product into single-stranded DNA, the mutation analysis of the single-stranded DNA by SSCP and the rehybridized double-stranded DNA by HA. These steps were performed entirely on-chip within several minutes of operation. The combination of these two mutation detection methods on-chip provides a highly sensitive method of mutation detection for either genotyping or screening. Many mutation analysis methods rely upon fluorescently labeled samples from a PCR with fluorescently labeled primers. By labeling on-chip we not only attain improved signal strength, but the method is considerably more versatile. Although we used PCR products in this work, this method could be used to analyze DNA from any source. We believe that this combination of several procedures on a single chip represents a significant step in the development of higher levels of integration upon microfluidic devices.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.514
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations26
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectrophoresisSame topicMicrofluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207