MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Next‐generation mapping of Arabidopsis genes

2011· article· en· W1572357774 on OpenAlexaff
Ryan S. Austin, Danielle P. Vidaurre, George Stamatiou, Robert Breit, Nicholas J. Provart, Dario Bonetta, Jianfeng Zhang, Pauline Fung, Yunchen Gong, Pauline W. Wang, Peter McCourt, David S. Guttman

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Plant Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputational biologyBiologyGeneticsGenomePopulationArabidopsisDNA sequencingGeneReference genomeMutant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Next-generation genomic sequencing technologies have made it possible to directly map mutations responsible for phenotypes of interest via direct sequencing. However, most mapping strategies proposed to date require some prior genetic analysis, which can be very time-consuming even in genetically tractable organisms. Here we present a de novo method for rapidly and robustly mapping the physical location of EMS mutations by sequencing a small pooled F₂ population. This method, called Next Generation Mapping (NGM), uses a chastity statistic to quantify the relative contribution of the parental mutant and mapping lines to each SNP in the pooled F₂ population. It then uses this information to objectively localize the candidate mutation based on its exclusive segregation with the mutant parental line. A user-friendly, web-based tool for performing NGM analysis is available at http://bar.utoronto.ca/NGM. We used NGM to identify three genes involved in cell-wall biology in Arabidopsis thaliana, and, in a power analysis, demonstrate success in test mappings using as few as ten F₂ lines and a single channel of Illumina Genome Analyzer data. This strategy can easily be applied to other model organisms, and we expect that it will also have utility in crops and any other eukaryote with a completed genome sequence.

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)0.001
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
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.139 · 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

Citations312
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Plant JournalSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207