MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081276045 · doi:10.1139/g04-088

Survey of a cDNA library from the turkey (<i>Meleagris gallopavo</i>)

2005· article· en· W2081276045 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lee Chaves, JA Rowe, Kent M. Reed

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Genetics and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyExpressed sequence tagGeneticsGenomeContigSingle-nucleotide polymorphismMeleagris gallopavoBovine genomeComplementary DNAcDNA librarySequence analysisIntronGeneGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Genome characterization and analysis is an imperative step in identifying and selectively breeding for improved traits of agriculturally important species. Expressed sequence tags (ESTs) represent a transcribed portion of the genome and are an effective way to identify genes within a species. Downstream applications of EST projects include DNA microarray construction and interspecies comparisons. In this study, 694 ESTs were sequenced and analyzed from a library derived from a 24-day-old turkey embryo. The 437 unique sequences identified were divided into 76 assembled contigs and 361 singletons. The majority of significant comparative matches occurred between the turkey sequences and sequences reported from the chicken. Whole genome sequence from the chicken was used to identify potential exon-intron boundaries for selected turkey clones and intron-amplifying primers were developed for sequence analysis and single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) discovery. Identified SNPs were genotyped for linkage analysis on two turkey reference populations. This study significantly increases the number of EST sequences available for the turkey.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.888
Threshold uncertainty score0.266

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations20
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicAnimal Genetics and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207