MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3145763192 · doi:10.3390/ijms22073617

Construction of Whole Genomes from Scaffolds Using Single Cell Strand-Seq Data

2021· article· en· W3145763192 on OpenAlexafffund
Mark Hills, Ester Falconer, Kieran O’Neill, Ashley D. Sanders, Kerstin Howe, Victor Guryev, Peter M. Lansdorp

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Molecular Sciences · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaAbCellera (Canada)Stemcell TechnologiesBC Cancer Agency
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchTerry Fox Research Institute
KeywordsBiologyGenomeGeneticsSequence assemblyComputational biologyContigChromosomeChromosome conformation captureReference genomeGenomicsGeneGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate reference genome sequences provide the foundation for modern molecular biology and genomics as the interpretation of sequence data to study evolution, gene expression, and epigenetics depends heavily on the quality of the genome assembly used for its alignment. Correctly organising sequenced fragments such as contigs and scaffolds in relation to each other is a critical and often challenging step in the construction of robust genome references. We previously identified misoriented regions in the mouse and human reference assemblies using Strand-seq, a single cell sequencing technique that preserves DNA directionality Here we demonstrate the ability of Strand-seq to build and correct full-length chromosomes by identifying which scaffolds belong to the same chromosome and determining their correct order and orientation, without the need for overlapping sequences. We demonstrate that Strand-seq exquisitely maps assembly fragments into large related groups and chromosome-sized clusters without using new assembly data. Using template strand inheritance as a bi-allelic marker, we employ genetic mapping principles to cluster scaffolds that are derived from the same chromosome and order them within the chromosome based solely on directionality of DNA strand inheritance. We prove the utility of our approach by generating improved genome assemblies for several model organisms including the ferret, pig, Xenopus, zebrafish, Tasmanian devil and the Guinea pig.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 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

Citations15
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Molecular Sciences→Same topicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies→French-language works237,207→