Analysis of mitochondrial genome methylation using Nanopore single-molecule sequencing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The level and the biological significance of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) methylation in human cells is a controversial topic. Using long-read third-generation sequencing technology, mtDNA methylation can be detected directly from the sequencing data, which overcomes previously suggested biases, introduced by bisulfite treatment-dependent methods. We investigated mtDNA from whole blood-derived DNA and established a workflow to detect CpG methylation with Nanopolish. In order to obtain native mtDNA, we adjusted a whole-genome sequencing protocol and performed ligation library preparation and Nanopore sequencing. To validate the workflow, 897bp of methylated and unmethylated synthetic DNA samples at different dilution ratios were sequenced and CpG methylation was detected. Interestingly, we observed that reads with higher methylation in the synthetic DNA did not pass Guppy calling, possibly affecting conclusions about DNA methylation in Nanopore sequencing. We detected in all blood-derived samples overall low-level methylation across the mitochondrial genome, with exceptions at certain CpG sites. Our results suggest that Nanopore sequencing is capable of detecting low-level mtDNA methylation. However, further refinement of the bioinformatical pipelines including Guppy failed reads are recommended.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".