MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2370952859

Study on Optimization of RAPD Reaction Conditions for Lilium

2012· article· en· W2370952859 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chengyun Li

Bibliographic record

VenueSeed · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicEcology and Conservation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRAPDPrimer (cosmetics)GermplasmLiliumBiologyDNAPolymerase chain reactionGenetic diversityBotanyMolecular biologyGeneticsChemistryGeneMedicineOrganic chemistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The optimum RAPD reaction system for Lilium was established using RAPD amplification with six factors(DNA template,Mg2+,TaqDNA polymerase,primer,dNTPs and annealing temperature).The optimum RAPD reaction system(25 μL) contains 40 ng DNA template,1.5 mmol/L Mg2+,1.0 U TaqDNA polymerase,1.0 μmol/L RAPD primer and 200 μmol/L dNTPs.The suitable annealing temperature of primer E 13 was 37.3 ℃.The research laid the foundation for RAPD analysis on studies of germplasm resources identification and genetic diversity in Lilium.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeedSame topicEcology and Conservation StudiesFrench-language works237,207