MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048864372 · doi:10.3791/870

Technical Demonstration of Whole Genome Array Comparative Genomic Hybridization

2008· article· en· W2048864372 on OpenAlexafffund
Jennifer Y. Kennett, Spencer K. Watson, Heather Saprunoff, Cameron Heryet, Wan L. Lam

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Visualized Experiments · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
FundersNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute of Dental and Craniofacial ResearchGenome British ColumbiaGenome Canada
KeywordsComparative genomic hybridizationComputational biologyGenomeBiologyGenomicsGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Array comparative genomic hybridization (array CGH) is a method for detecting gains and losses of DNA segments or gene dosage in the genome. Recent advances in this technology have enabled high resolution comparison of whole genomes for the identification of genetic alterations in cancer and other genetic diseases. The Sub-Megabase Resolution Tiling-set array (or SMRT) array is comprised of a set of approximately thirty thousand overlapping bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) clones that span the human genome in approximately 100 kilobase pair (kb) segments. These BAC targets are individually synthesized and spotted in duplicate on a single glass slide. Array CGH is based on the principle of competitive hybridization. Sample and reference DNA are differentially labeled with Cyanine-3 and Cyanine-5 fluorescent dyes, and co-hybridized to the array. After an incubation period the unbound samples are washed from the slide and the array is imaged. A freely available custom software package called SeeGH (www.flintbox.ca) is used to process the large volume of data collected--a single experiment generates 53,892 data points. SeeGH visualizes the log2 signal intensity ratio between the 2 samples at each BAC target which is vertically aligned with chromosomal position. The SMRT array can detect alterations as small as 50 kb in size. The SMRT array can detect a variety of DNA rearrangement events including DNA gains, losses, amplifications and homozygous deletions. A unique advantage of the SMRT array is that one can use DNA isolated from formalin fixed paraffin embedded samples. When combined with the low input requirements of unamplified DNA (25-100 ng) this allows profiling of precious samples such as those produced by microdissection. This is attributed to the large size of each BAC hybridization target that allows the binding of sufficient labeled samples to produce signals for detection. Another advantage of this platform is the tolerance of tissue heterogeneity, decreasing the need for tedious tissue microdissection. This video protocol is a step-by-step tutorial from labeling the input DNA through to signal acquisition for the whole genome tiling path SMRT array.

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)0.004
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.020

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.325 · 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

Citations5
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Visualized ExperimentsSame topicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalitiesFrench-language works237,207