Quantitative assessment of mitochondrial DNA copies from whole genome sequencing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mitochondrial dysfunction is associated with various aging diseases. The copy number of mtDNA in human cells may therefore be a potential biomarker for diagnostics of aging. Here we propose a new computational method for the accurate assessment of mtDNA copies from whole genome sequencing data. RESULTS: Two families of the human whole genome sequencing datasets from the HapMap and the 1000 Genomes projects were used for the accurate counting of mitochondrial DNA copy numbers. The results revealed the parental mitochondrial DNA copy numbers are significantly lower than that of their children in these samples. There are 8%~21% more copies of mtDNA in samples from the children than from their parents. The experiment demonstrated the possible correlations between the quantity of mitochondrial DNA and aging-related diseases. CONCLUSIONS: Since the next-generation sequencing technology strives to deliver affordable and non-biased sequencing results, accurate assessment of mtDNA copy numbers can be achieved effectively from the output of whole genome sequencing. We implemented the method as a software package MitoCounter with the source code and user's guide available to the public at http://sourceforge.net/projects/mitocounter/.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".