MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2517305685 · doi:10.1186/s12711-016-0237-6

Lessons for livestock genomics from genome and transcriptome sequencing in cattle and other mammals

2016· article· en· W2517305685 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueGenetics Selection Evolution · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Food and AgricultureUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of California, Los AngelesU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsBiologyReference genomeGenomeContigGenomicsImputation (statistics)Sequence assemblyBovine genomeGeneticsWhole genome sequencingDeep sequencingComputational biologyDNA sequencingEvolutionary biologyGeneTranscriptomeMissing data

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Decreasing sequencing costs and development of new protocols for characterizing global methylation, gene expression patterns and regulatory regions have stimulated the generation of large livestock datasets. Here, we discuss experiences in the analysis of whole-genome and transcriptome sequence data. METHODS: We analyzed whole-genome sequence (WGS) data from 132 individuals from five canid species (Canis familiaris, C. latrans, C. dingo, C. aureus and C. lupus) and 61 breeds, three bison (Bison bison), 64 water buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) and 297 bovines from 17 breeds. By individual, data vary in extent of reference genome depth of coverage from 4.9X to 64.0X. We have also analyzed RNA-seq data for 580 samples representing 159 Bos taurus and Rattus norvegicus animals and 98 tissues. By aligning reads to a reference assembly and calling variants, we assessed effects of average depth of coverage on the actual coverage and on the number of called variants. We examined the identity of unmapped reads by assembling them and querying produced contigs against the non-redundant nucleic acids database. By imputing high-density single nucleotide polymorphism data on 4010 US registered Angus animals to WGS using Run4 of the 1000 Bull Genomes Project and assessing the accuracy of imputation, we identified misassembled reference sequence regions. RESULTS: We estimate that a 24X depth of coverage is required to achieve 99.5 % coverage of the reference assembly and identify 95 % of the variants within an individual's genome. Genomes sequenced to low average coverage (e.g., <10X) may fail to cover 10 % of the reference genome and identify <75 % of variants. About 10 % of genomic DNA or transcriptome sequence reads fail to align to the reference assembly. These reads include loci missing from the reference assembly and misassembled genes and interesting symbionts, commensal and pathogenic organisms. CONCLUSIONS: Assembly errors and a lack of annotation of functional elements significantly limit the utility of the current draft livestock reference assemblies. The Functional Annotation of Animal Genomes initiative seeks to annotate functional elements, while a 70X Pac-Bio assembly for cow is underway and may result in a significantly improved reference assembly.

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.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.887
Threshold uncertainty score0.536

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.225 · 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