MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111554750 · doi:10.1139/g00-117

Melon bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) library construction using improved methods and identification of clones linked to the locus conferring resistance to melon Fusarium wilt (<i>Fom</i>-<i>2</i>)

2001· article· en· W2111554750 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Meizhong Luo, Y.H. Wang, David Frisch, Tarek Joobeur, Rod A. Wing, Ralph A. Dean

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant tissue culture and regeneration
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBiologyBacterial artificial chromosomeEcoRIGeneticsFusarium wiltLocus (genetics)HindIIIGenomic libraryGenomeChromosomeGenePlasmidFusarium oxysporum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Utilizing improved methods, two bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) libraries were constructed for the multidisease-resistant line of melon MR-1. The HindIII library consists of 177 microtiter plates in a 384-well format, while the EcoRI library consists of 222 microtiter plates. Approximately 95.6% of the HindIII library clones contain nuclear DNA inserts with an average size of 118 kb, providing a coverage of 15.4 genome equivalents. Similarly, 96% of the EcoRI library clones contain nuclear DNA inserts with an average size of 114 kb, providing a coverage of 18.7 genome equivalents. Both libraries were evaluated for contamination with high-copy vector, empty pIndigoBac536 vector, and organellar DNA sequences. High-density filters were screened with two genetic markers FM and AM that co-segregate with Fom-2, a gene conferring resistance to races 0 and 1 of Fusarium wilt. Fourteen and 18 candidate BAC clones were identified for the FM and AM probes, respectively, from the HindIII library, while 34 were identified for the AM probe from filters A, B, and C of the EcoRI library.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Bench or experimentallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Bench or experimentalhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

Citations105
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicPlant tissue culture and regenerationFrench-language works237,207