MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023153549 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0033840

De-Novo Assembly and Analysis of the Heterozygous Triploid Genome of the Wine Spoilage Yeast Dekkera bruxellensis AWRI1499

2012· article· en· W2023153549 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Chris Curtin, Anthony R. Borneman, Paul J. Chambers, Isak S. Pretorius

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFermentation and Sensory Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian GovernmentAlberta Water Research Institute
KeywordsBiologyGeneticsGenomePloidyContigGenome sizeSequence assemblyWhole genome sequencingGeneTranscriptome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite its industrial importance, the yeast species Dekkera (Brettanomyces) bruxellensis has remained poorly understood at the genetic level. In this study we describe whole genome sequencing and analysis for a prevalent wine spoilage strain, AWRI1499. The 12.7 Mb assembly, consisting of 324 contigs in 99 scaffolds (super-contigs) at 26-fold coverage, exhibits a relatively high density of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). Haplotype sampling for 1.2% of open reading frames suggested that the D. bruxellensis AWRI1499 genome is comprised of a moderately heterozygous diploid genome, in combination with a divergent haploid genome. Gene content analysis revealed enrichment in membrane proteins, particularly transporters, along with oxidoreductase enzymes. Availability of this assembly and annotation provides a resource for further investigation of genomic organization in this species, and functional characterization of genes that may confer important phenotypic traits.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.164 · 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

Citations132
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicFermentation and Sensory AnalysisFrench-language works237,207