Identifying novel genes in C. elegans using SAGE tags
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite extensive efforts devoted to predicting protein-coding genes in genome sequences, many bona fide genes have not been found and many existing gene models are not accurate in all sequenced eukaryote genomes. This situation is partly explained by the fact that gene prediction programs have been developed based on our incomplete understanding of gene feature information such as splicing and promoter characteristics. Additionally, full-length cDNAs of many genes and their isoforms are hard to obtain due to their low level or rare expression. In order to obtain full-length sequences of all protein-coding genes, alternative approaches are required. RESULTS: In this project, we have developed a method of reconstructing full-length cDNA sequences based on short expressed sequence tags which is called sequence tag-based amplification of cDNA ends (STACE). Expressed tags are used as anchors for retrieving full-length transcripts in two rounds of PCR amplification. We have demonstrated the application of STACE in reconstructing full-length cDNA sequences using expressed tags mined in an array of serial analysis of gene expression (SAGE) of C. elegans cDNA libraries. We have successfully applied STACE to recover sequence information for 12 genes, for two of which we found isoforms. STACE was used to successfully recover full-length cDNA sequences for seven of these genes. CONCLUSIONS: The STACE method can be used to effectively reconstruct full-length cDNA sequences of genes that are under-represented in cDNA sequencing projects and have been missed by existing gene prediction methods, but their existence has been suggested by short sequence tags such as SAGE tags.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".