MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4239116342 · doi:10.1093/condor/102.1.191

Difficulties Storing and Preserving Tyrant Flycatcher Blood Samples used for Genetic Analyses

2000· article· en· W4239116342 on OpenAlexaff
K. F. Conrad, R. J. Robertson, Peter T. Boag

Bibliographic record

VenueOrnithological Applications · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDNA extractionFlycatcherBiologyDNA profilingLysis bufferZoologyDNAGeneticsPolymerase chain reaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We stored blood samples of Eastern Phoebes (Sayornis phoebe) in a lysis buffer (“QLB”) that has been used successfully to preserve blood samples of many other species. We found that although samples from adults were not affected greatly, samples of nestling blood stored for more than a few days did not reliably produce the quantity and quality of DNA useful for multi-locus DNA fingerprinting. We also were unable to extract usable DNA from blood samples collected from Eastern Kingbird (Tyrannus tyrannus) nestlings, but obtained usable DNA from blood of Least Flycatcher (Empidonax minimus) nestlings stored for more than a year. We recommend that anyone planning DNA research with tyrant flycatchers should conduct their DNA extractions as soon as possible after collection. A pilot study to test methods of storage, preservation, and extraction may be necessary before beginning a large-scale project.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations5
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrnithological ApplicationsSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207