MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3005767372 · doi:10.7717/peerj.8523

Comparison of the performance of ITS1 and ITS2 as barcodes in amplicon-based sequencing of bioaerosols

2020· article· en· W3005767372 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePeerJ · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIndoor Air Quality and Microbial Exposure
Canadian institutionsCanadian Food Inspection AgencyUniversité LavalInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
FundersInstitut de Recherche Robert-Sauvé en Santé et en Sécurité du Travail
KeywordsMetagenomicsAmpliconAmplicon sequencingBiologyShotgun sequencingComputational biologyBarcodePopulationShotgunDNA sequencingEvolutionary biologyGenetics16S ribosomal RNAPolymerase chain reactionGeneComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the performance of two eukaryotic genomic ribosomal regions, ITS1 and ITS2, in describing fungal diversity in aerosol samples using amplicon-based High-Throughput Sequencing (HTS). Composting sites, biomethanization facilities, and dairy farms, all affected by the presence of fungi, were visited to collect air samples. The amplicon-based HTS approach is a target enrichment method that relies on the amplification of a specific target using particular primers before sequencing. Thus, the results are highly dependent on the quality of amplification. For this reason, the authors of this paper used a shotgun metagenomic approach to compare its outcome with the amplicon-based method. Indeed, shotgun metagenomic does not rely on any amplification prior to sequencing, because all genes are sequenced without a specific target. In addition, culture methods were added to the analyses in biomethanization and dairy farms samples to validate their contribution to fungal diversity of aerosols. The results obtained are unequivocal towards ITS1 outperformance to ITS2 in terms of richness, and taxonomic coverage. The differential abundance analysis did demonstrate that some taxa were exclusively detected only by ITS2, and vice-versa for ITS1. However, the shotgun metagenomic approach showed a taxonomic profile more resembling to ITS1 than ITS2. Based on these results, neither of the barcodes evaluated is perfect in terms of distinguishing all species. Using both barcodes offers a broader view of the fungal aerosol population. However, with the actual knowledge, the authors strongly recommend using ITS1 as a universal fungal barcode for quick general analyses of diversity and when limited financial resources are available, primarily due its ability to capture taxonomic profiles similar to those obtained using the shotgun metagenomic. The culture comparison with amplicon-based sequencing showed the complementarity of both approaches in describing the most abundant taxa.

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.

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 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 score0.255
Threshold uncertainty score0.182

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.239 · 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