MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951282393 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2019-0047

A duplex ddPCR assay for simultaneously detecting <i>Ips sexdentatus</i> and <i>Ips typographus</i> (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) in bulk trap samples

2019· article· en· W2951282393 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Frida A. Zink, Luke R. Tembrock, Alicia E. Timm, Todd M. Gilligan

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidad de ValladolidSveriges LantbruksuniversitetU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsCurculionidaeBiologyInvasive speciesBark beetleDNA barcodingIntroduced speciesEndangered speciesBark (sound)EcologyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bark beetles in the family Curculionidae present a growing hazard to forests worldwide. Like native bark beetles, introduced exotic species can pose a serious threat to North American forests. Ips typographus (Boerner) and Ips sexdentatus (Linnaeus), both native to Europe, are two such pests that have caused widespread forest loss in their native ranges. International trade has led to increased interceptions of Scolytine beetles at ports of entry to the United States. Most intercepted individuals are not identified to species due to lack of expert identifiers, poor specimen quality, or incomplete taxonomy. These same problems affect identification for domestic surveys. Therefore, development of molecular methods for identification of potentially invasive Ips species is essential. Because of the need to scrutinize large numbers of beetles in an efficient manner, we describe a duplex droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) assay to identify I. typographus and I. sexdentatus simultaneously in bulk trap samples containing 500 Scolytinae specimens using a scalable, two-step DNA extraction. This ddPCR method is highly effective for processing the entire contents of beetle traps and identifying these potentially invasive species in a timely and definitive manner. We also describe a nondestructive DNA extraction technique that preserves specimens for morphological identification.

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 score1.000
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations15
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207