MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2551981267 · doi:10.1139/gen-2016-0067

Estimation of long terminal repeat element content in the <i>Helicoverpa zea</i> genome from high-throughput sequencing of bacterial artificial chromosome pools

2016· article· en· W2551981267 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Brad S. Coates, Craig A. Abel, Omaththage P. Perera

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInsect Resistance and Genetics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBacterial artificial chromosomeBiologyContigGenomeGenome sizeGeneticsChromosomeHelicoverpa zeaWhole genome sequencingPloidyPEST analysisGeneBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The lepidopteran pest insect Helicoverpa zea feeds on cultivated corn and cotton across the Americas where control remains challenging owing to the evolution of resistance to chemical and transgenic insecticidal toxins, yet genomic resources remain scarce for this species. A bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) library having a mean genomic insert size of 145 ± 20 kbp was created from a laboratory strain of H. zea, which provides ∼12.9-fold coverage of a 362.8 ± 8.8 Mbp (0.37 ± 0.09 pg) flow cytometry estimated haploid genome size. Assembly of Illumina HiSeq 2000 reads generated from 14 pools that encompassed all BAC clones resulted in 165 485 genomic contigs (N50 = 3262 bp; 324.6 Mbp total). Long terminal repeat (LTR) protein coding regions annotated from 181 contigs included 30 Ty1/copia, 78 Ty3/gypsy, and 73 BEL/Pao elements, of which 60 (33.1%) encoded all five functional polyprotein (pol) domains. Approximately 14% of LTR elements are distributed non-randomly across pools of BAC clones.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicInsect Resistance and GeneticsFrench-language works237,207