MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952043149 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0200177

Over 2.5 million COI sequences in GenBank and growing

2018· article· en· W2952043149 on OpenAlexaff
Teresita M. Porter, Mehrdad Hajibabaei

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenBankBarcodeUsabilityAnnotationPopularityBiologyDatabaseGeographyComputer scienceEvolutionary biologyInformation retrievalBioinformaticsGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing popularity of cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 (COI) DNA metabarcoding warrants a careful look at the underlying reference databases used to make high-throughput taxonomic assignments. The objectives of this study are to document trends and assess the future usability of COI records for metabarcode identification. The number of COI records deposited to the NCBI nucleotide database has increased by a geometric average of 51% per year, from 8,137 records deposited in 2003 to a cumulative total of ~ 2.5 million by the end of 2017. About half of these records are fully identified to the species rank, 92% are at least 500 bp in length, 74% have a country annotation, and 51% have latitude-longitude annotations. To ensure the future usability of COI records in GenBank we suggest: 1) Improving the geographic representation of COI records, 2) Improving the cross-referencing of COI records in the Barcode of Life Data System and GenBank to facilitate consolidation and incorporation into existing bioinformatic pipelines, 3) Adherence to the minimum information about a marker gene sequence guidelines, and 4) Integrating metabarcodes from eDNA and mixed community studies with existing reference sequences. The growth of COI reference records over the past 15 years has been substantial and is likely to be a resource across many fields for years to come.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.172 · 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.

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

Citations176
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207