MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3107325434 · doi:10.1093/jas/skaa278.149

353 ASAS-EAAP Talk: Low-coverage whole-genome sequencing in local livestock breeds

2020· article· en· W3107325434 on OpenAlexaff
J. Casellas, Melani Martín de Hijas-Villalba, Marta Vázquez-Gómez, Samir Id Lahoucine

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyGeneticsPopulationContext (archaeology)GenomePloidySNPLivestockChromosomeBreedEvolutionary biologySingle-nucleotide polymorphismGenotypeGeneDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Current European regulations for autochthonous livestock breeds put a special emphasis on pedigree completeness, which requires laboratory paternity testing by genetic markers in most cases. This entails significant economic expenditure for breed societies and precludes other investments in breeding programs, such as genomic evaluation. Within this context, we developed paternity testing through low-coverage whole-genome data in order to reuse these data for genomic evaluation at no cost. Simulations relied on diploid genomes composed by 30 chromosomes (100 cM each) with 3,000,000 SNP per chromosome. Each population evolved during 1,000 non-overlapping generations with effective size 100, mutation rate 10–4, and recombination by Kosambi’s function. Only those populations with 1,000,000 ± 10% polymorphic SNP per chromosome in generation 1,000 were retained for further analyses, and expanded to the required number of parents and offspring. Individuals were sequenced at 0.01, 0.05, 0.1, 0.5 and 1X depth, with 100, 500, 1,000 or 10,000 base-pair reads and by assuming a random sequencing error rate per SNP between 10–2 and 10–5. Assuming known allele frequencies in the population and sequencing error rate, 0.05X depth sufficed to corroborate the true father (85,0%) and to discard other candidates (96,3%). Those percentages increased up to 99,6% and 99,9% with 0,1X depth, respectively (read length = 10,000 bp; smaller read lengths slightly improved the results because they increase the number of sequenced SNP). Results were highly sensitive to biases in allele frequencies and robust to inaccuracies regarding sequencing error rate. Low-coverage whole-genome sequencing data could be subsequently integrated into genomic BLUP equations by appropriately constructing the genomic relationship matrix. This approach increased the correlation between simulated and predicted breeding values by 1.21% (h2 = 0.25; 100 parents and 900 offspring; 0.1X depth by 10,000 bp reads). Although small, this increase opens the door to genomic evaluation in local livestock breeds.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.007

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207