Syotti: scalable bait design for DNA enrichment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MOTIVATION: Bait enrichment is a protocol that is becoming increasingly ubiquitous as it has been shown to successfully amplify regions of interest in metagenomic samples. In this method, a set of synthetic probes ('baits') are designed, manufactured and applied to fragmented metagenomic DNA. The probes bind to the fragmented DNA and any unbound DNA is rinsed away, leaving the bound fragments to be amplified for sequencing. Metsky et al. demonstrated that bait-enrichment is capable of detecting a large number of human viral pathogens within metagenomic samples. RESULTS: We formalize the problem of designing baits by defining the Minimum Bait Cover problem, show that the problem is NP-hard even under very restrictive assumptions, and design an efficient heuristic that takes advantage of succinct data structures. We refer to our method as Syotti. The running time of Syotti shows linear scaling in practice, running at least an order of magnitude faster than state-of-the-art methods, including the method of Metsky et al. At the same time, our method produces bait sets that are smaller than the ones produced by the competing methods, while also leaving fewer positions uncovered. Lastly, we show that Syotti requires only 25 min to design baits for a dataset comprised of 3 billion nucleotides from 1000 related bacterial substrains, whereas the method of Metsky et al. shows clearly super-linear running time and fails to process even a subset of 17% of the data in 72 h. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: https://github.com/jnalanko/syotti. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.012 |
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".