MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2180775343 · doi:10.1603/0022-2585-38.4.501

Ability of Cellulose Acetate and Polyacrylamide Enzyme Electrophoresis to Separate 13 Species of Phlebotomine Sand Flies (Diptera: Psychodidae) from Venezuela

2001· article· en· W2180775343 on OpenAlexafffund
Dara G. Torgerson, Margarita Lampo, Patrick T. K. Woo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Entomology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicResearch on Leishmaniasis Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Bureau for International EducationConsejo Nacional para Investigaciones Científicas y TecnológicasWorld Health Organization
KeywordsBiologyCellulose acetatePsychodidaePolyacrylamide gel electrophoresisFaunaAllelePolyacrylamideElectrophoresisCelluloseZoologyEnzymeGeneticsBotanyMolecular biologyBiochemistryLeishmaniasisGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The detection of cryptic species by biochemical methods indicates that within the phlebotomine fauna morphological data are not always adequate for species diagnosis. Cellulose acetate and polyacrylamide enzyme electrophoresis methods were compared for their effectiveness in identifying 13 species of Venezuelan phlebotomine sand flies and resolving alleles. Eight diagnostic loci unambiguously separated these 13 species of sand flies. Although acrylamide was as effective as cellulose acetate in species separation, differences were detected in the resolution of some alleles. Cellulose acetate identified more alleles at Ak and Fum, and resolved better at Pgm, whereas acrylamide identified more alleles at Gpi, Mdh, and Me. Therefore, erroneous species diagnoses may occur, if diagnostic loci detected by one technique are used by a second technique without adequate reference standards.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.582
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.308 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical EntomologySame topicResearch on Leishmaniasis StudiesFrench-language works237,207