MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1935982488 · doi:10.1101/011411

Sequence and primer independent stochastic heterogeneity in PCR amplification efficiency revealed by single molecule barcoding

2014· preprint· en· W1935982488 on OpenAlexaff
Katharine Best, Theres Oakes, James Heather, John Shawe‐Taylor, Benny Chain

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2014
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMolecular Biology Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrimer (cosmetics)BiologyContext (archaeology)Computational biologyPolymerase chain reactionDNA barcodingDNA sequencingSequence (biology)DNAGeneticsGeneEvolutionary biologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is one of the most widely used techniques in molecular biology. In combination with High Throughput Sequencing (HTS), PCR is widely used to quantify transcript abundance for RNA-seq and especially in the context of analysis of T cell and B cell receptor repertoires. In this study, we combine molecular DNA barcoding with HTS to quantify PCR output from individual target molecules. Our results demonstrate that the PCR process exhibits very significant unexpected heterogeneity, which is independent of the sequence of the primers or target, and independent of bulk experimental conditions. The mechanistic origin of this heterogeneity is not clear, but simulations suggest that it must derive from inherited differences between different DNA molecules within the reaction. The results illustrate that single molecule barcoding is important in order to derive reproducible quantitative results from any protocol which combines PCR with HTS.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.250
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicMolecular Biology Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207