Maximizing the Efficacy of SAGE Analysis Identifies Novel Transcripts in Arabidopsis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The efficacy of using Serial Analysis of Gene Expression (SAGE) to analyze the transcriptome of the model dicotyledonous plant Arabidopsis was assessed. We describe an iterative tag-to-gene matching process that exploits the availability of the whole genome sequence of Arabidopsis. The expression patterns of 98% of the annotated Arabidopsis genes could theoretically be evaluated through SAGE and using an iterative matching process 79% could be identified by a tag found at a unique site in the genome. A total of 145,170 reliable experimental tags from two Arabidopsis leaf tissue SAGE libraries were analyzed, of which 29,632 were distinct. The majority (93%) of the 12,988 experimental tags observed greater than once could be matched within the Arabidopsis genome. However, only 78% were matched to a single locus within the genome, reflecting the complexities associated with working in a highly duplicated genome. In addition to a comprehensive assessment of gene expression in Arabidopsis leaf tissue, we describe evidence of transcription from pseudo-genes as well as evidence of alternative mRNA processing and anti-sense transcription. This collection of experimental SAGE tags could be exploited to assist in the on-going annotation of the Arabidopsis genome.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".