MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377019631 · doi:10.1101/2023.05.16.541004

CRISPR-based diagnostics detects invasive insect pests

2023· preprint· en· W4377019631 on OpenAlexfundno aff
P. R. Shashank, Brandon M. Parker, Santosh R. Rananaware, David Plotkin, Christian Couch, Lilia G. Yang, Long Thành Nguyễn, W. Evan Braswell, Piyush Jain, Akito Y. Kawahara

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaAnimal and Plant Health Inspection ServiceIndian Agricultural Research InstituteNational Institutes of HealthU.S. Department of AgricultureIndian Council of Agricultural ResearchUniversity of Florida
KeywordsCRISPRInsectBiologyBiotechnologyEcologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Rapid identification of organisms is essential across many biological and medical disciplines, from understanding basic ecosystem processes and how organisms respond to environmental change, to disease diagnosis and detection of invasive pests. CRISPR-based diagnostics offers a novel and rapid alternative to other identification methods and can revolutionize our ability to detect organisms with high accuracy. Here we describe a CRISPR-based diagnostic developed with the universal cytochrome-oxidase 1 gene (CO1). The CO1 gene is the most sequenced gene among Animalia, and therefore our approach can be adopted to detect nearly any animal. We tested the approach on three difficult-to-identify moth species ( Keiferia lycopersicella, Phthorimaea absoluta , and Scrobipalpa atriplicella ) that are major invasive pests globally. We designed an assay that combines recombinase polymerase amplification (RPA) with CRISPR for signal generation. Our approach has a much higher sensitivity than other real time-PCR assays and achieved 100% accuracy for identification of all three species, with a detection limit of up to 120 fM for P. absoluta and 400 fM for the other two species. Our approach does not require a lab setting, reduces the risk of cross-contamination, and can be completed in less than one hour. This work serves as a proof of concept that has the potential to revolutionize animal detection and monitoring.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.239 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicCRISPR and Genetic EngineeringFrench-language works237,207