MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082506112 · doi:10.1139/g01-113

Genome size and microsatellites: the effect of nuclear size on amplification potential

2002· article· en· W2082506112 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Trenton W. J. Garner

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyGenome sizeGenomeMicrosatellitePrimer (cosmetics)Polymerase chain reactionGeneticsNuclear DNAMultiple displacement amplificationDNAGeneMitochondrial DNADNA extractionAllele

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the frequency of microsatellite DNA regions generally increases with increasing genome size, genome size has a negative effect on polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification. Thus, researchers developing sets of PCR primers, as is commonly done for microsatellite DNA regions, may encounter greater difficulty when working with species that have larger genomes. I investigated the effect of genome size on overall amplification success using data from nine different metazoan taxa. The proportion of primer sets that did not amplify PCR products was strongly and positively correlated with the haploid C value of the target species. Increasing genome size may affect amplification success negatively because of a decrease in target:nontarget DNA or by dilution of the available primer pool by nonspecific binding.

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)0.012
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.187 · 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
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

Citations91
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207