MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946832465

Map-based cloning for plants gene isolation

2005· article· zh· W2946832465 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Qitao Yan, Hui Lü, Wanxia Mao, LI Jian-yue

Bibliographic record

Venue分子植物育种 · 2005
Typearticle
Languagezh
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloning (programming)Computational biologyGeneGeneticsMolecular cloningBiologyGenomePositional cloningComputer scienceGene expressionPhenotype
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are the disadvantages of traditional gene cloning ways by functional and phonetypical analyses, including unknown products expressed by relation genes and uneasy-operation to the gene. The technique of map-based cloning has being perfected now, and already become a kind of valuable method for gene isolation. It has been extensive applied in a lot of plant gene cloning. This review introduced briefly the principle of map-based cloning, and give detailed description of the operation steps by map-based cloing: screening molecular marker connected with target gene, orientating target gene, constructing big fragment genome library as well as screening and identificating the target gene. This paper also summarized the progress of map-based cloning on plant gene isolation, and set forward the prospect on application of map-based cloning. In the future, with the guidance of genomic herredity system theory and at the backgrounds of molecular marker based on PCR in high pleiomorphism, the application of map-based cloning might achieve more shining progress in plant gene cloning.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.026

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.230 · 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
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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue分子植物育种Same topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207