MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982160768 · doi:10.1093/gigascience/giz126

Access to RNA-sequencing data from 1,173 plant species: The 1000 Plant transcriptomes initiative (1KP)

2019· article· en· W2982160768 on OpenAlexaff
Eric Carpenter, Naim Matasci, Saravanaraj Ayyampalayam, Shuangxiu Wu, Jing Sun, Jun Yu, Fabio Rocha Jimenez Vieira, Chris Bowler, Richard G. Dorrell, Matthew A. Gitzendanner, Ling Li, Wensi Du, Kristian K Ullrich, Norman J. Wickett, Todd J Barkmann, Michael S. Barker, Jim Leebens‐Mack, Gane Ka‐Shu Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueGigaScience · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranscriptomeBiologyGeneComputational biologyDe novo transcriptome assemblyPlant speciesGenomeEvolutionary biologyDNA sequencingGeneticsGene expressionBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The 1000 Plant transcriptomes initiative (1KP) explored genetic diversity by sequencing RNA from 1,342 samples representing 1,173 species of green plants (Viridiplantae). FINDINGS: This data release accompanies the initiative's final/capstone publication on a set of 3 analyses inferring species trees, whole genome duplications, and gene family expansions. These and previous analyses are based on de novo transcriptome assemblies and related gene predictions. Here, we assess their data and assembly qualities and explain how we detected potential contaminations. CONCLUSIONS: These data will be useful to plant and/or evolutionary scientists with interests in particular gene families, either across the green plant tree of life or in more focused lineages.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesOpen science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.999
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.006

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.193 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations179
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGigaScienceSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207