MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2157011177 · doi:10.1139/g07-109

Purification of circular YACs from yeast cells for DNA sequencing

2008· article· en· W2157011177 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sun‐Hee Leem, Young-Ho Yoon, Sang-deug KIM, V. Larionov

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsYeast artificial chromosomeBiologyDNARestriction enzymeGeneticsMolecular biologyDNA sequencingGenomeChromosomeHuman genomeDNA nanoball sequencingContigGeneGenomic libraryGene mappingBase sequence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe a method for the purification of circular yeast artificial chromosome (YAC) DNA 120-150 kilobases (kb) in size that is of sufficient quantity and quality for restriction enzyme analysis and DNA sequencing. This method preferentially enriches for circular YAC DNA and avoids the time-consuming step of centrifugation in CsCl--ethidium bromide (EtBr) gradients. We applied this method to the purification of circular YACs carrying DNA segments that are extremely unstable in E. coli, including those that correspond to GAP2 and GAP3 on human chromosome 19. We showed that YAC DNA (GAP2 and GAP3) purified using this new method is clearly resolved in EtBr-stained gels. The sequence of YAC-GAP3 was obtained, representing the first GAP clone sequenced in YAC form. At present, it is estimated that there are more than 1000 gaps in the human genome that cannot be cloned using bacterial vectors. Thus, our new method may be very useful for completing the last stage of the human genome project.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.007

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations4
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenome→Same topicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms→French-language works237,207→