MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058421849 · doi:10.2298/abs1201191s

The reproducibility of RAPD profiles: Effects of PCR components on RAPD analysis of four centaurium species

2012· article· en· W2058421849 on OpenAlexaff
Marijana Škorić, Branislav Šiler, Tijana Banjanac, Jasmina Zivkovic, Slavica Dmitrović, Danijela Mišić, D. Grubišić

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Biological Sciences · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Biological Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRAPDPrimer (cosmetics)BiologyPolymerase chain reactionDNAMolecular biologyReproducibilityGenetic diversityGeneticsChromatographyChemistryGenePopulationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) analysis is a simple and reliable method used to detect DNA polymorphism. Several factors can affect the amplification profiles, thereby causing false bands and non-reproducibility of the assay. In this study, we analyzed the effects of different concentrations of primer, magnesium chloride, template DNA and Taq DNA polymerase to develop and standardize a RAPD protocol for Centaurium species. The optimized PCR reaction mixture included: 50 ng of DNA extracted using a CTbased protocol, 2.5 mM MgCl2, 7.5 pmol primer and 2 U of Taq polymerase in a final volume of 25 ?l. Each of the five primers used in experiments (OPB11, OPB15, OPB18, OPF05 and OPH02) generated reproducible and distinguishable fingerprinting patterns of four Centaurium species. The obtained optimized RAPD protocol and the selected primers are useful for our further work in the genetic diversity studies of Centaurium species.

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)0.001
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 score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score0.507

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations15
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Biological SciencesSame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207