MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6921415220 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.c.7421753

HBeeID: a molecular tool that identifies honey bee subspecies from different geographic populations

2024· other· en· W6921415220 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHoney beeSubspeciesLinear discriminant analysisHoney BeesPrincipal component analysisBeekeeping

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Honey bees are the principal commercial pollinators. Along with other arthropods, they are increasingly under threat from anthropogenic factors such as the incursion of invasive honey bee subspecies, pathogens and parasites. Better tools are needed to identify bee subspecies. Genomic data for economic and ecologically important organisms is increasing, but in its basic form its practical application to address ecological problems is limited. Results We introduce HBeeID a means to identify honey bees. The tool utilizes a knowledge-based network and diagnostic SNPs identified by discriminant analysis of principle components and hierarchical agglomerative clustering. Tests of HBeeID showed that it identifies African, Americas-Africanized, Asian, and European honey bees with a high degree of certainty even when samples lack the full 272 SNPs of HBeeID. Its prediction capacity decreases with highly admixed samples. Conclusion HBeeID is a high-resolution genomic, SNP based tool, that can be used to identify honey bees and screen species that are invasive. Its flexible design allows for future improvements via sample data additions from other localities.

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)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.212

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0630.013

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.217 · 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
GenreMethods

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 venueFigshare→French-language works237,207→