Telomere length measurement by qPCR in birds is affected by storage method of blood samples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Given the potential role of telomeres as biomarkers of individual health and ageing, there is an increasing interest in studying telomere dynamics in a wider range of taxa in the fields of ecology and evolutionary biology. Measuring telomere length across the lifespan in wild animal systems is essential for testing these hypotheses, and may be aided by archived blood samples collected as part of longitudinal field studies. However, sample collection, storage, and DNA extraction methods may influence telomere length measurement, and it may, therefore, be difficult to balance consistency in sampling protocol with making the most of available samples. We used two complementary approaches to examine the impacts of sample storage method on measurements of relative telomere length (RTL) by qPCR, particularly focusing on FTA (Flinders Technology Associates) cards as a long-term storage solution. We used blood samples from wandering albatrosses collected over 14 years and stored in three different ways (n = 179), and also blood samples from captive zebra finches (n = 30) that were each stored using three different methods. Sample storage method influenced RTL in both studies, and samples on FTA cards had significantly shorter RTL measurements. There was no significant correlation between RTL measured in zebra finch blood on FTA cards and the same samples stored either as frozen whole blood or as extracted DNA. These results highlight the importance of consistency of sampling protocol, particularly in the context of long-term field studies, and suggest that FTA cards should not be used as a long-term storage solution to measure RTL without validation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".