MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115405849 · doi:10.1007/s13199-012-0154-6

Simultaneous genome sequencing of symbionts and their hosts

2011· article· en· W2115405849 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sujai Kumar, Mark Blaxter

Bibliographic record

VenueSymbiosis · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect symbiosis and bacterial influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDirectorate for Biological SciencesUniversity of TorontoUniversity of EdinburghNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBiologyGenomeDNA sequencingComputational biologyBacterial genome sizeIn silicoDeep sequencingSequence assemblyGeneticsWhole genome sequencingEvolutionary biologyGeneTranscriptome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Second-generation sequencing has made possible the sequencing of genomes of interest for even small research groups. However, obtaining separate clean cultures and clonal or inbred samples of metazoan hosts and their bacterial symbionts is often difficult. We present a computational pipeline for separating metazoan and bacterial DNA in silico rather than at the bench. The method relies on the generation of deep coverage of all the genomes in a mixed sample using Illumina short-read sequencing technology, and using aggregate properties of the different genomes to identify read sets belonging to each. This inexpensive and rapid approach has been used to sequence several nematode genomes and their bacterial endosymbionts in the last year in our laboratory and can also be used to visualize and identify unexpected contaminants (or possible symbionts) in genomic DNA samples. We hope that this method will enable researchers studying symbiotic systems to move from gene-centric to genome-centric approaches.

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 score0.005

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.188
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 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

Citations53
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSymbiosisSame topicInsect symbiosis and bacterial influencesFrench-language works237,207