MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2338039188 · doi:10.1101/047142

Detecting DNA Methylation using the Oxford Nanopore Technologies MinION sequencer

2016· preprint· en· W2338039188 on OpenAlexaff
Jared T. Simpson, Rachael E. Workman, Philip C. Zuzarte, Matei David, Lewis Jonathan Dursi, Winston Timp

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2016
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoOntario Institute for Cancer Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMinionNanopore sequencingNanoporeDNA sequencer5-MethylcytosineDNA methylationDNA sequencingDNAComputational biologyComputer scienceBiologyGeneticsNanotechnologyGeneMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Nanopore sequencing instruments measure the change in electric current caused by DNA transiting through the pore. In experimental and prototype nanopore sequencing devices it has been shown that the electrolytic current signals are sensitive to base modifications, such as 5-methylcytosine. Here we quantify the strength of this effect for the Oxford Nanopore Technologies MinION sequencer. Using synthetically methylated DNA we are able to train a hidden Markov model to distinguish 5-methylcytosine from unmethylated cytosine in DNA. We demonstrate by sequencing natural human DNA, without any special library preparation, that global patterns of methylation can be detected from low-coverage sequencing and that the methylation status of CpG islands can be reliably predicted from single MinION reads. Our trained model and prediction software is open source and freely available to the community under the MIT license.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.218 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations27
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207