MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964434160 · doi:10.1111/tpj.14468

An ‘<scp>eFP</scp>‐Seq Browser’ for visualizing and exploring <scp>RNA</scp> sequencing data

2019· article· en· W2964434160 on OpenAlexafffund
Alexander Sullivan, P. Purohit, Nowlan H. Freese, Asher Pasha, Eddi Esteban, Jamie Waese, Alison Wu, Michelle Chen, Chih Y. Chin, Richard Song, Sneha R. Watharkar, Agnes P. Chan, Vivek Krishnakumar, Matthew Vaughn, Chris Town, Ann E. Loraine, Nicholas J. Provart

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Plant Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Institutes of HealthGenome Canada
KeywordsRNA-SeqGenome browserComputational biologyVisualizationComputer scienceFunction (biology)DNA sequencingGeneRNARNA splicingTranscriptomeBiologyGenomeGene expressionGeneticsData miningGenomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Improvements in next-generation sequencing technologies have resulted in dramatically reduced sequencing costs. This has led to an explosion of '-seq'-based methods, of which RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) for generating transcriptomic data is the most popular. By analysing global patterns of gene expression in organs/tissues/cells of interest or in response to chemical or environmental perturbations, researchers can better understand an organism's biology. Tools designed to work with large RNA-seq data sets enable analyses and visualizations to help generate hypotheses about a gene's function. We present here a user-friendly RNA-seq data exploration tool, called the 'eFP-Seq Browser', that shows the read map coverage of a gene of interest in each of the samples along with 'electronic fluorescent pictographic' (eFP) images that serve as visual representations of expression levels. The tool also summarizes the details of each RNA-seq experiment, providing links to archival databases and publications. It automatically computes the reads per kilobase per million reads mapped expression-level summaries and point biserial correlation scores to sort the samples based on a gene's expression level or by how dissimilar the read map profile is from a gene splice variant, to quickly identify samples with the strongest expression level or where alternative splicing might be occurring. Links to the Integrated Genome Browser desktop visualization tool allow researchers to visualize and explore the details of RNA-seq alignments summarized in eFP-Seq Browser as coverage graphs. We present four cases of use of the eFP-Seq Browser for ABI3, SR34, SR45a and U2AF65B, where we examine expression levels and identify alternative splicing. The URL for the browser is https://bar.utoronto.ca/eFP-Seq_Browser/. OPEN RESEARCH BADGES: This article has earned an Open Data Badge for making publicly available the digitally-shareable data necessary to reproduce the reported results. Tool is at https://bar.utoronto.ca/eFP-Seq_Browser/; RNA-seq data at https://s3.amazonaws.com/iplant-cdn/iplant/home/araport/rnaseq_bam/ and https://s3.amazonaws.com/iplant-cdn/iplant/home/araport/rnaseq_bam/Klepikova/. Code is available at https://github.com/BioAnalyticResource/eFP-Seq-Browser.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.355
Threshold uncertainty score0.591

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.185 · 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.

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

Citations60
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Plant JournalSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207