MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The use of the green fluorescent protein as a biomarker for sapstain fungi

2002· article· en· W2020897880 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueForest Pathology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyGreen fluorescent proteinOphiostomaFungusMicrobiologyMyceliumColonizationSporeBotanyGeneBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To understand wood colonization by sapstain fungi and their potential biocontrol agents, it is necessary to differentiate these organisms directly on their natural substrates. In the present study the feasibility of transforming with the green fluorescent protein (GFP), the sapstain fungus Ophiostoma piceae and a potential biocontrol agent Cartapip ® , an Ophiostoma piliferum albino strain was assessed. Transformants of the two fungal species were screened by polymerase chain reaction and Southern blot analyses. The GFP was expressed in spores, synnemata and mycelia of the transformants grown in artificial media or wood. The growth, pigmentation and wood colonization of the transformants were similar to that of the non‐transformants, suggesting that the presence of the gfp gene had no negative effect on the biology of the transformants. Using fluorescence and confocal microscopy, the GFP‐expressing fungi were easily differentiated from the wild‐type strains and other fungal species in wood, even 4 months after inoculation. The results show that the use of the GFP system is feasible to monitor Ophiostoma fungi in wood.

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.

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 score0.273
Threshold uncertainty score0.766

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.190 · 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