IDBA-MT: <i>De Novo</i> Assembler for Metatranscriptomic Data Generated from Next-Generation Sequencing Technology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High-throughput next-generation sequencing technology provides a great opportunity for analyzing metatranscriptomic data. However, the reads produced by these technologies are short and an assembling step is required to combine the short reads into longer contigs. As there are many repeat patterns in mRNAs from different genomes and the abundance ratio of mRNAs in a sample varies a lot, existing assemblers for genomic data, transcriptomic data, and metagenomic data do not work on metatranscriptomic data and produce chimeric contigs, that is, incorrect contigs formed by merging multiple mRNA sequences. To our best knowledge, there is no assembler designed for metatranscriptomic data. In this article, we introduce an assembler called IDBA-MT, which is designed for assembling reads from metatranscriptomic data. IDBA-MT produces much fewer chimeric contigs (reduce by 50% or more) when compared with existing assemblers such as Oases, IDBA-UD, and Trinity.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.007 |
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".