MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020281045 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0049755

The Chaperonin-60 Universal Target Is a Barcode for Bacteria That Enables De Novo Assembly of Metagenomic Sequence Data

2012· article· en· W2020281045 on OpenAlexafffund
Matthew G. Links, Tim Dumonceaux, Sean M. Hemmingsen, Janet E. Hill

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaSaskatchewan Research Council (Canada)University of SaskatchewanAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBarcodeMetagenomicsBiologyDNA barcoding16S ribosomal RNAComputational biologyPhylumPyrosequencingGeneticsGenomeRibosomal RNAGeneBacteriaEvolutionary biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Barcoding with molecular sequences is widely used to catalogue eukaryotic biodiversity. Studies investigating the community dynamics of microbes have relied heavily on gene-centric metagenomic profiling using two genes (16S rRNA and cpn60) to identify and track Bacteria. While there have been criteria formalized for barcoding of eukaryotes, these criteria have not been used to evaluate gene targets for other domains of life. Using the framework of the International Barcode of Life we evaluated DNA barcodes for Bacteria. Candidates from the 16S rRNA gene and the protein coding cpn60 gene were evaluated. Within complete bacterial genomes in the public domain representing 983 species from 21 phyla, the largest difference between median pairwise inter- and intra-specific distances ("barcode gap") was found from cpn60. Distribution of sequence diversity along the ∼555 bp cpn60 target region was remarkably uniform. The barcode gap of the cpn60 universal target facilitated the faithful de novo assembly of full-length operational taxonomic units from pyrosequencing data from a synthetic microbial community. Analysis supported the recognition of both 16S rRNA and cpn60 as DNA barcodes for Bacteria. The cpn60 universal target was found to have a much larger barcode gap than 16S rRNA suggesting cpn60 as a preferred barcode for Bacteria. A large barcode gap for cpn60 provided a robust target for species-level characterization of data. The assembly of consensus sequences for barcodes was shown to be a reliable method for the identification and tracking of novel microbes in metagenomic studies.

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)0.000
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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.160 · 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

Citations159
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207