RADProc: A computationally efficient de novo locus assembler for population studies using RADseq data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Restriction site-associated DNA sequencing (RADseq) is a powerful tool for genotyping of individuals, but the identification of loci and assignment of sequence reads is a crucial and often challenging step. The optimal parameter settings for a given de novo RADseq assembly vary between data sets and can be difficult and computationally expensive to determine. Here, we introduce RADProc, a software package that uses a graph data structure to represent all sequence reads and their similarity relationships. Storing sequence-comparison results in a graph eliminates unnecessary and redundant sequence similarity calculations. De novo locus formation for a given parameter set can be performed on the precomputed graph, making parameter sweeps far more efficient. RADProc also uses a clustering approach for faster nucleotide-distance calculation. The performance of RADProc compares favourably with that of the widely used Stacks software. The run-time comparisons between RADProc and Stacks for 32 different parameter settings using 20 green-crab (Carcinus maenas) samples showed that RADProc took as little as 2 hr 40 min compared to 78 hr by Stacks, while 16 brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) samples were processed by RADProc and Stacks in 23 and 263 hr, respectively. Comparisons of the de novo loci formed, and catalog built using both the methods demonstrate that the improvement in processing speeds achieved by RADProc does not affect much the actual loci formed and the results of downstream analyses based on those loci.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".