MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110813189 · doi:10.1139/b06-047

DNA barcoding in land plants: evaluation of <i>rbcL</i> in a multigene tiered approach

2006· article· en· W2110813189 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Steven G. Newmaster, Aron J. Fazekas, Subramanyam Ragupathy

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Botany · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicIdentification and Quantification in Food
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersGenome Canada
KeywordsDNA barcodingGenBankBiologyLocus (genetics)BarcodeMitochondrial DNAGeneEvolutionary biologyTaxonomic rankComputational biologyIdentification (biology)GeneticsEcologyComputer scienceTaxon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

DNA barcoding based on the mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase 1 (cox1) sequence is being employed for diverse groups of animals with demonstrated success in species identification and new species discovery. Applying barcoding systems to land plants will be a more challenging task as plant genome substitution rates are considerably lower than those observed in animal mitochondria, suggesting that a much greater amount of sequence data from multiple loci will be required to barcode plants. In the absence of an obvious well-characterized plant locus that meets all the necessary criteria, a key first step will be identifying candidate regions with the most potential. To meet the challenges with land plants, we are proposing the adoption of a tiered approach wherein highly variable loci are nested under a core barcoding gene. Analysis of over 10 000 rbcL sequences from GenBank demonstrate that this locus could serve well as the core region, with sufficient variation to discriminate among species in approximately 85% of congeneric pair-wise comparisons. Use of a secondary locus can be implemented when required and can vary from group to group if necessary. The implementation of a barcoding tool has multiple academic and practical applications. It will speed routine identifications and the detection of alien species, advance ecological and taxonomic inquiry, permit fast and accurate forensic analysis of plant fragments, and can function as an additional layer of quality control in the food industry.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations369
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of BotanySame topicIdentification and Quantification in FoodFrench-language works237,207