MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135208818 · doi:10.1603/an10153

Diptera-Specific Polymerase Chain Reaction Amplification Primers of use in Molecular Phylogenetic Research

2011· article· en· W2135208818 on OpenAlexaff
Joel F. Gibson, Scott Kelso, Morgan D. Jackson, Joel H. Kits, Gil Felipe Gonçalves Miranda, Jeffrey H. Skevington

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the Entomological Society of America · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect symbiosis and bacterial influences
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphCarleton UniversityAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyPhylogenetic treeGenePrimer (cosmetics)Polymerase chain reactionMitochondrial DNARibosomal RNAGeneticsMolecular biologyTriosephosphate isomeraseNuclear genePolymeraseMT-RNR1Cytochrome b

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract DNA sequence data from a variety of mitochondrial and nuclear gene regions are significant components of phylogenetic research in entomology. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification primers for many gene regions have been developed that are specific to a range of dipteran groups. Here, we review the existing Diptera-specific PCR amplification primers that have been published for 11 mitochondrial and nuclear gene regions: 12S small ribosomal subunit, cytochrome b, cytochrome oxidase c subunit I, 28S ribosomal RNA, alanyl-tRNA synthetase, the carbamoyl phosphate synthase region of CAD, elongation factor-1α, 6-phosphogluconate dehydrogenase, triose phosphate isomerase, white, and wingless. We also have designed in total 94 new PCR amplification primers for use in these same gene regions. Our new primers have been developed and tested using our DNA sequence database of > 1,600 specimens representing 40 families of Diptera. All of the past and newly developed primer sequences are presented in tables, and their locations are shown on gene maps. This combined data will facilitate future molecular phylogenetic research within Diptera.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.460
Threshold uncertainty score0.626

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.208
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.112 · 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

Citations72
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the Entomological Society of AmericaSame topicInsect symbiosis and bacterial influencesFrench-language works237,207