MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2338023675 · doi:10.1139/gen-2015-0220

Priming of a DNA metabarcoding approach for species identification and inventory in marine macrobenthic communities

2016· article· en· W2338023675 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Cláudia Hollatz, Barbara R. Leite, Jorge Lobo, Hugo J.C. Froufe, Conceição Egas, Filipe O. Costa

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyEnvironmental DNASpecies richnessBiodiversityPhylumEcologyPyrosequencingSpecies diversityOperational taxonomic unitSpecies identificationIdentification (biology)Taxonomic rankSpecies descriptionEvolutionary biologyTaxonomy (biology)Taxon16S ribosomal RNAGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In marine and estuarine benthic communities, the inventory and estimation of species richness are often hampered by the need for broad taxonomic expertise across several phyla. The use of DNA metabarcoding has emerged as a powerful tool for the fast assessment of species composition in a diversity of ecological communities. Here, we tested the amplification success of five primer sets targeting different COI-5P regions by 454 pyrosequencing to maximize the recovery of two simulated macrobenthic communities containing 21 species (SimCom1 and SimCom 2). Species identification was first performed against a compiled reference library of macrobenthic species. Reads with similarity results to reference sequences between 70% and 97% were then submitted to GenBank and BOLD to attempt the identification of concealed species in the bulk sample. The combination of at least three primer sets was able to recover more species than any primer set alone, achieving 85% of represented species in SimCom1 and 76% in SimCom2. Our approach was successful to detect low-frequency specimens, as well as concealed species, in the bulk sample, indicating the potential for the application of this approach on marine bioassessment and inventory, including the detection of "hidden" biodiversity that would hardly be possible based on morphology only.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.385
Threshold uncertainty score0.244

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.173 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations29
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenomeSame topicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207