Dimethyldimethyl Hydantoin: An Alternative Fluid for Morphological and Genetic Preservation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modern taxonomy requires the preservation of biospecimens for both morphological and molecular applications. The utility of a previously identified preservative, dimethyldimethylhydantoin hydantoin (Dekafald ® ), to retain both physical diagnostic traits and the DNA integrity of biological specimens remains unknown. Using 439 eggs and 414 larvae from two North American fish species, we compared three hydantoin solutions at different concentrations (5%, 10%, and 20%) with gold standard preservatives (10% buffered formalin, 95% ethanol) to evaluate morphological trait retention up to 90 days, and DNA barcoding success up to 56 days. While the 5% hydantoin solution had the most sequencing success by 56 days, the 10% hydantoin solution was the best multipurpose preservative. Future work should assess the performance of ∼10% hydantoin solution over longer time periods, and its applicability to other taxa such as Arthropoda.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".