MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3107543393 · doi:10.1016/j.ecoenv.2020.111691

Progress in the use of DNA barcodes in the identification and classification of medicinal plants

2020· review· en· W3107543393 on OpenAlexaff
Jie Yu, Xi Wu, Chang Liu, Steve Newmaster, Subramanyam Ragupathy, W. John Kress

Bibliographic record

VenueEcotoxicology and Environmental Safety · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNational College Students Innovation and Entrepreneurship Training ProgramNational Institutes of Natural SciencesNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsDNA barcodingIdentification (biology)BiologyComputational biologyDNA sequencingBarcodeGenomeAuthentication (law)BiotechnologyDNAEvolutionary biologyGeneticsComputer scienceGeneBotanyComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

DNA barcoding is an emerging molecular identification and classification technology that has been applied to medicinal plants since 2008. The application of this technique has greatly ensured the safety and effectiveness of medicinal materials. In this paper, we review the application of DNA barcoding and some related technologies over the past 10 years with respect to improving our knowledge of medicinal plant identification and authentication. From single locus-based DNA barcodes to combined markers to genome-scale levels, DNA barcodes contribute more and more genetic information. At the same time, other technologies, such as high-resolution melting (HRM), have been combined with DNA barcoding. With the development of next-generation sequencing (NGS), metabarcoding technology has also been shown to identify species in mixed samples successfully. As a widely used and effective tool, DNA barcoding will become more useful over time in the field of medicinal plants.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations158
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcotoxicology and Environmental SafetySame topicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207