MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Towards an Automated, In-Situ Environmental DNA Sensor for Detection of Marine Species

2024· article· en· W4404688948 on OpenAlexaff
Colin Sonnichsen, Eddy Luy, Andre Hendricks, Iain Grundke, B. Clifford Hendricks, Kareem El-Beshbeeshy, Gabriel Roberts, M. Wright, Julie LaRoche, Robert G. Beiko, Jim Hanlon, R. R. Race, Arnold Furlong, Jennifer Tolman, Shannon Myles, Mahtab Tavasoli, Vincent J. Sieben

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIn situEnvironmental DNADNAComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceComputational biologyRemote sensingChemistryBiologyEcologyGeologyBiodiversityGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The collection and analysis of environmental DNA is slow, difficult and costly. To facilitate and broaden the use of eDNA technologies, an autonomous eDNA sensor has been designed for in-situ qPCR analysis. The eDNA sensor will provide results in near real-time, reporting the positive or negative detection of a target DNA sequence. The sensor is designed to operate fully autonomously, with on-board reagents, rechargeable batteries, and positive and negative controls. To verify sensor results and to enable a broader swath of lab-based analyses, archival samples are acquired in parallel with analyzed samples. Subsystems of sampling, extraction, and analysis have all been independently tested with promising results. The eDNA sensor presented here will enable same-day decision making regarding commercial activity, conservation efforts, and field research.

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: none
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)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies→French-language works237,207→