MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032598510 · doi:10.3126/narj.v8i0.11563

Optimization of PCR Conditions for DNA Amplification of Common Buckwheat Using EST Primers

2014· article· en· W2032598510 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bal Krishna Joshi, Kazutoshi Okuno, Ryo Ohsawa, Takashi Hara

Bibliographic record

VenueNepal Agriculture Research Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSeed and Plant Biochemistry
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrimer (cosmetics)BiologyPolymerase chain reactionDNATransferabilityMolecular biologyPrimer dimerGeneticsChemistryMultiplex polymerase chain reactionGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Under optimal conditions the PCR reaction is very efficient; microgram quantities may be synthesized from a single molecule of substrate DNA. DNA of four lines of common buckwheat (Kyusu, Canada, Miyazaki and Botansoba) was used to optimize PCR reaction and cycling program of 26 primers for DNA amplification of common buckwheat. Annealing temperature (Ta), PCR cycle number and MgCl2 concentration were considered optimum if the single clear band was observed. Of the 26 primers Ta of only 10 primers could be optimized. Three primer pairs performed best at Ta of 54°C. The optimum concentration of MgCl2 was found to be 1.5mM for all primer pairs. Similarly the number of PCR cycles was found to be 40 for all 10 primer pairs except for primer pair 57. Optimized PCR conditions were used for subsequent studies such as transferability of EST primers to other Fagopyrum species and construction of linkage map.Nepal Agric. Res. J. Vol. 8, 2007, pp. 1-6DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/narj.v8i0.11563

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.007

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.257 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNepal Agriculture Research JournalSame topicSeed and Plant BiochemistryFrench-language works237,207