MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2599191298

DNA Storage Project

2001· article· en· W2599191298 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
James Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueAFA Watchbird · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInsect Resistance and Genetics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndangered speciesBiologyPopulationCaptive breedingGenetic diversityHabitat destructionEcologyConservation geneticsBiodiversityWildlifeHabitatEvolutionary biologyZoologyGeneticsMicrosatelliteGene
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As serious aviculturists we have expressed interest in preserving endangered avian species by the captive breeding and reintroduction of the offspring back to the wild. At the present time there are few opportunities to do this because of continuing environmental destruction and continued loss of habitat. The Avian Preservation Foundation of Canada has investigated a program that would allow aviculturists to take the first step in preserving many of these endangered species. We are negotiating a contract with the biotechnology company, Health Gene Inc., to collect and store genetic material from these endangered species with the aim of reconstructing these species in the future. At the present time it is possible but not feasible to reconstruct a species from it's DNA. Recent advances in molecular genetics indicate that this will be feasible in the foreseeable future if the DNA is available. If this stored DNA is from a diverse enough gene pool, a viable population of a species could be reconstructed for reintroduction. We need to act now to save genetic material from as many individuals of these species before so many have disappeared that it would limit the genetic diversity required for a viable population. We would expect to have to store this DNA for ten to twenty years to allow the technology to be developed to make this reconstruction feasible. What we propose is that holders of endangered species collect either a blood sample or 5-6 chest feathers from as many individuals as possible from their collections and submit these samples to HealthGene for storage. As there are costs involved with sample preparation and storage, we ask that $20 US/sample be included with each sample. HealthGene will be offering quantity discounts to encourage submission of as many samples as possible. This money will cover storage charges for the first ten years. The Avian Preservation Foundation will generate the funds to cover costs beyond this time. What species should be considered? There are many species that are obvious candidates for this program: Spix Macaws, Echo Parakeets, Bali Mynahs, Caribbean Amazons, etc. All of the CITES Appendix r species should be stored. Many other species could easily become just as endangered. We don't know. No one could have predicted the demise of the Carolina parakeet or the Passenger pigeon. We will leave it up to aviculture to decide which species should be stored. Most are obvious and will depend on how much aviculture is willing to spend on preservation. We would hope that holders of CITES Appendix I species would be the first to join this program but conditions can change very quickly. It would be foolish to think that just because a species is common today that it could not become endangered tomorrow. Many species that were once common in aviculture have disappeared before anyone realized. If this were to happen then there might not be enough individuals left in captivity to reconstruct the species if it should become endangered in the wild. How many samples are necessary? The obvious answer is the more samples from as diverse a population as possible should be saved. I would think that you would want to save samples from a pair but not their offspring. As to other individuals, there is very little information available for most species on the inter-relatedness of the individuals in captivity. As a result, the more samples saved the greater the chance of reconstructing a viable population. When the technology is available, the DNA for each sample of a species would be sequenced and the range of variation within the species determined. In this way the largest variation for each species would be used resulting in the healthiest group of individuals for the reconstructed population. Who would own the DNA samples? The samples would remain with the Avian Preservation Foundation of Canada until both the technology is available and the need arises to process the samples. Until the technology is available, these samples have no commercial value. At the time when reconstruction is possible and necessary, the DNA will be used to rebuild a population of the near or totally extinct species represented. The process will likely be expensive and the Avian Preservation Foundation of Canada will be responsible for generating the necessary funds for the project. We have no way of knowing what conditions will exist in 20-30 years in the future (or however long it will take), but we do know that extinction is very permanent. Without the stored DNA, extinction of these species could be the final result. This program is a pilot project and we hope that organizations with interests in other families of creatures, such as mammals, reptiles, etc. will undertake similar programs. Whatever we learn from this project will be made available to any groups interested in duplicating this process. We hope that we are not too late for many of the endangered bird species. We are too late for those now extinct. For a very small price you can help to ensure that the species that you love will exist for future generations to enjoy, as you now are able to. You have a chance to really make a difference. ~

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.717
Threshold uncertainty score0.471

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.242 · 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.

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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAFA WatchbirdSame topicInsect Resistance and GeneticsFrench-language works237,207