MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952788979 · doi:10.1101/015552

A complete bacterial genome assembled <i>de novo</i> using only nanopore sequencing data

2015· preprint· en· W2952788979 on OpenAlexafffund
Nicholas J. Loman, Joshua Quick, Jared T. Simpson

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2015
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsOntario Institute for Cancer Research
FundersMedical Research CouncilSurgical Reconstruction and Microbiology Research CentreGovernment of OntarioOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchOxford Nanopore Technologies
KeywordsMinionContigNanopore sequencingSequence assemblyNanoporeHybrid genome assemblyReference genomeBacterial genome sizeComputational biologyGenomeSequence (biology)Hidden Markov modelComputer scienceBiologyAlgorithmGeneticsGeneArtificial intelligenceNanotechnologyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A method for de novo assembly of data from the Oxford Nanopore MinION instrument is presented which is able to reconstruct the sequence of an entire bacterial chromosome in a single contig. Initially, overlaps between nanopore reads are detected. Reads are then subjected to one or more rounds of error correction by a multiple alignment process employing partial order graphs. After correction, reads are assembled using the Celera assembler. Finally, the assembly is polished using signal-level data from the nanopore employing a novel hidden Markov model. We show that this method is able to assemble nanopore reads from Escherichia coli K-12 MG1655 into a single contig of length 4.6Mb permitting a full reconstruction of gene order. The resulting draft assembly has 98.4% nucleotide identity compared to the finished reference genome. After polishing the assembly with our signal-level HMM, the nucleotide identity is improved to 99.4%. We show that MinION sequencing data can be used to reconstruct genomes without the need for a reference sequence or data from other sequencing platforms.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.202 · 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
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

Citations26
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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