Validation of a universal set of primers to study animal‐associated microeukaryotic communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The application of metabarcoding to study animal-associated microeukaryotes has been restricted because the universal barcode used to study microeukaryotic ecology and distribution in the environment, the Small Subunit of the Ribosomal RNA gene (18S rRNA), is also present in the host. As a result, when host-associated microbial eukaryotes are analysed by metabarcoding, the reads tend to be dominated by host sequences. We have done an in silico validation against the SILVA 18S rRNA database of a non-metazoan primer set (primers that are biased against the metazoan 18S rRNA) that recovers only 2.6% of all the metazoan sequences, while recovering most of the other eukaryotes (80.4%). Among metazoans, the non-metazoan primers are predicted to amplify 74% of Porifera sequences, 4% of Ctenophora, and 15% of Cnidaria, while amplifying almost no sequences within Bilateria. In vivo, these non-metazoan primers reduce significantly the animal signal from coral and human samples, and when compared against universal primers provide at worst a 2-fold decrease in the number of metazoan reads and at best a 2800-fold decrease. This easy, inexpensive, and near-universal method for the study of animal-associated microeukaryotes diversity will contribute to a better understanding of the microbiome.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".