Standard methods for molecular research in<i>Apis mellifera</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SummaryFrom studies of behaviour, chemical communication, genomics and developmental biology, among many others, honey bees have long been a key organism for fundamental breakthroughs in biology. With a genome sequence in hand, and much improved genetic tools, honey bees are now an even more appealing target for answering the major questions of evolutionary biology, population structure, and social organization. At the same time, agricultural incentives to understand how honey bees fall prey to disease, or evade and survive their many pests and pathogens, have pushed for a genetic understanding of individual and social immunity in this species. Below we describe and reference tools for using modern molecular-biology techniques to understand bee behaviour, health, and other aspects of their biology. We focus on DNA and RNA techniques, largely because techniques for assessing bee proteins are covered in detail in Hartfelder et al. (2013). We cover practical needs for bee sampling, transport, and storage, and then discuss a range of current techniques for genetic analysis. We then provide a roadmap for genomic resources and methods for studying bees, followed by specific statistical protocols for population genetics, quantitative genetics, and phylogenetics. Finally, we end with three important tools for predicting gene regulation and function in honey bees: Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), RNA interference (RNAi), and the estimation of chromosomal methylation and its role in epigenetic gene regulation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.084 | 0.102 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".