Isolation of high‐quality RNA from white spruce tissue using a three‐stage purification method and subsequent cloning of a transcript from the PR‐10 gene family
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Isolation of PinmIII cDNA homologues from white spruce tissues required a rigorous RNA extraction protocol developed following assessment of three previously reported conifer RNA extraction protocols. Total RNA was extracted via several purification steps designed to minimize binding of phenolics to nucleic acids and was then subjected to caesium chloride ultra-centrifugation. This procedure produced consistently high-quality, intact RNA from both needles and roots with spectrophotometric ratios of approximately 2.0 for both 260/280 nm and 260/230 nm. Total RNA was obtained from the roots of cold-hardened white spruce seedlings for cDNA library construction. More than 2 million recombinant phage particles were generated from 5 microg of a poly(A)+RNA fraction, and ca. 1.3 million cDNA particles were amplified for storage. Approximately 500,000 primary recombinant clones were screened with an heterologous PinmIII cDNA sequence yielding a unique clone, picgl, that was very similar to members of the PR10 gene family.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it