MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014694676 · doi:10.1038/srep09687

Massively parallel multiplex DNA sequencing for specimen identification using an Illumina MiSeq platform

2015· article· en· W2014694676 on OpenAlexafffund
Shadi Shokralla, Teresita M. Porter, Joel F. Gibson, Rafal Dobosz, Daniel H. Janzen, Winnie Hallwachs, G. Brian Golding, Mehrdad Hajibabaei

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Genomics InstituteGuanacaste Dry Forest Conservation FundOntario GenomicsGenome CanadaForest Conservation FundJRS Biodiversity FoundationGovernment of CanadaWege FoundationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMassive parallel sequencingMultiplexDNA sequencingMassively parallelComputational biologyIdentification (biology)Illumina dye sequencingComputer scienceBiologyDNABioinformaticsGeneticsParallel computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Genetic information is a valuable component of biosystematics, especially specimen identification through the use of species-specific DNA barcodes. Although many genomics applications have shifted to High-Throughput Sequencing (HTS) or Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) technologies, sample identification (e.g., via DNA barcoding) is still most often done with Sanger sequencing. Here, we present a scalable double dual-indexing approach using an Illumina Miseq platform to sequence DNA barcode markers. We achieved 97.3% success by using half of an Illumina Miseq flowcell to obtain 658 base pairs of the cytochrome c oxidase I DNA barcode in 1,010 specimens from eleven orders of arthropods. Our approach recovers a greater proportion of DNA barcode sequences from individuals than does conventional Sanger sequencing, while at the same time reducing both per specimen costs and labor time by nearly 80%. In addition, the use of HTS allows the recovery of multiple sequences per specimen, for deeper analysis of genetic variation in target gene regions.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.642

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations275
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207