MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7046127134

Conservation analysis of potential cis-NATs in Brassicaceae plants for crop improvement

2014· dissertation· en· W7046127134 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2014
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Gene Expression Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrassicaceaeCropCanolaCultivar
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canola fuels a multi-billion dollar industry in Canada. It is a Canadian trademarked name of specific cultivars derived from specific Brassicaceae plants. Cis-NATs are natural antisense transcripts that overlap a gene and are not translated into proteins. Instead, they silence their parent gene's expression through various mechanisms. Their role in humans is well established, but their role in plants is relatively obscure. The goal of this thesis project is to analyze the conservation of cis-NATs across 8 different Brassicaceae genera (9 species). This is useful for picking up targets for crop improvement in canola. Conservation was studied across the 9 species, then across two subgroups of 4 and 2 species, respectively; cis-NATs simultaneously exhibiting conservation in all three scenarios were selected. A total of 34 potential candidates were identified. The study also suggests that the type of a cis-NAT might also affect its conservation. The presented methodology is a powerful pre-screening strategy to direct experimental efforts. It can be used with genes and other transcribed non-coding DNA.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.243 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicPlant Gene Expression AnalysisFrench-language works237,207