MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2417742087 · doi:10.1007/978-1-60761-646-7_18

Reporter Gene-Based Recombination Lines for Studies of Genome Stability

2010· article· en· W2417742087 on OpenAlexaff
Palak Kathiria, Igor Kovalchuk

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in molecular biology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant tissue culture and regeneration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHomologous recombinationFLP-FRT recombinationRecombinationBiologyGeneticsChromatinGeneNon-allelic homologous recombinationGene targetingLocus (genetics)EpigeneticsEctopic recombinationGenetic recombinationReporter geneGenomeGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Homologous recombination is a double-strand break repair mechanism operating in somatic cells and involved in meiotic crossovers in plants. It is responsible for the maintenance of genome stability and thus plays a crucial role in adaptation to stress. Recombination between homologous loci is believed to be regulated in part by epigenetic machinery such as methylation. Therefore, the recombination frequency at a specific locus can reflect the chromatin status.Several reporter gene-based recombination constructs have been developed to study HR frequencies in plants. Among them, the luciferase and beta-glucuronidase-based recombination reporter systems are the most widely used. Here, we explain how reporter gene recombination assays operate and in which applications they are used. We also present a conceptually new system for analysis of sequence-specific recombination frequency. These assays can be effectively used for analysis of locus-specific endogenous and stress-induced recombination frequencies.

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)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.004

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.359 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods in molecular biology→Same topicPlant tissue culture and regeneration→French-language works237,207→