Collaborative environmental DNA sampling from petal surfaces of flowering cherry <i>Cerasus ×- yedoensis</i> 'Somei-yoshino' across the Japanese archipelago
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Recent studies have shown that environmental DNA is found almost everywhere. Flower petal surfaces are an attractive tissue to use for investigation of the dispersal of environmental DNA in nature as they are isolated from the external environment until the bud opens and only then can the petal surface accumulate environmental DNA. Here, we performed a crowdsourced experiment, the “Ohanami Project”, to obtain environmental DNA samples from petal surfaces of Cerasus × yedoensis ‘Somei-yoshino’ across the Japanese archipelago during spring 2015. C. × yedoensis is the most popular garden cherry species in Japan and clones of this cultivar bloom simultaneously every spring. Data collection spanned almost every prefecture and totaled 577 DNA samples from 149 collaborators. Preliminary amplicon-sequencing analysis showed the rapid attachment of environmental DNA onto the petal surfaces. Notably, we found DNA of other common plant species in samples obtained across a wide distribution; this DNA likely originated from pollen of the Japanese cedar. Our analysis supports our belief that petal surfaces after blossoming are a promising target to reveal the dynamics of environmental DNA in nature. The success of our experiment also shows that crowdsourced environmental DNA analyses have considerable value in ecological studies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".