Strategies for the Production of Transgenic Chickens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Insertion of foreign DNA into the germline requires access to the chromosomes of cells that give rise to sperm or eggs. From a theoretical point of view, the newly fertilized zygote is the most appropriate cell for genetic alteration because any modification of the genome will be inherited by every cell that subsequently develops within the organism. In mammals, random insertion of genes via injection of DNA into the pronucleus is the most cost-effective route for modification of the genome (see Chapter 31). If specific, targeted modifications to the genome are desired, however, an elaborate culture system is required that simultaneously supports proliferation of pluripotential embryonic stem cells and facilitates selection of cells that bear the specific genetic change (see Chapter 31). In the chicken, injection into the pronuclei of the newly fertilized egg is not feasible for two reasons. Firstly, the oocyte is located on the surface of the large and fragile yolk and techniques to identify, manipulate, and inject the female pronucleus have not yet been developed. Secondly, fertilization in avian species is associated with the entry of several sperm into the egg () and it is not yet possible to distinguish individual male pronuclei or to determine which male pronucleus will unite with the female pronucleus. Strategies for gaining access to the germline of chickens, therefore, have arisen through an improved understanding of the morphological and physiological events that occur between fertilization and differentiation of the primordial germ cell lineage.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".