MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4248417034 · doi:10.21203/rs.2.22101/v1

Development and comparison of RNA-Sequencing pipelines for more accurate SNP identification: Practical example of functional SNP detection associated with feed efficiency in Nellore beef cattle.

2020· preprint· en· W4248417034 on OpenAlexaff
Stephanie Lam, J. Zeidan, F. Miglior, Aroa Suárez‐Vega, Isabel Gómez‐Redondo, Pablo Augusto de Souza Fonseca, Lorelei Guan, Sinéad M. Waters, Ángela Cánovas

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square (Research Square) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSNPBeef cattleIdentification (biology)Computational biologyBiologyPipeline transportPipeline (software)Computer scienceAnimal scienceSingle-nucleotide polymorphismGeneticsEngineeringGeneEcologyGenotypeOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Optimization of an RNA-Sequencing (RNA-Seq) pipeline can maximize power and accuracy for identifying genetic variants, including SNPs, which may serve as genetic markers to select for feed efficiency, leading to economic benefits for beef production. This study determined an optimized pipeline for variant detection using a dataset with multiple samples and tissues. The RNA-Seq data (GEO Accession ID: PRJEB7696 and PRJEB15314) from muscle and liver tissue, respectively, from 12 Nellore beef steers selected from 585 steers with residual feed intake measures (RFI; n=6 low-RFI, n=6 high-RFI) were used. Three RNA-Seq pipelines were compared including multi-sample calling from i) non-merged samples; ii) merged samples by group for low-RFI and for high-RFI for each tissue, iii) merged samples by group and tissue for low- and high-RFI for both tissues. The RNA-Seq reads were aligned against the UMD3.1 bovine reference genome (release 94) assembly using STAR. Variants were called using BCFtools and variant effect prediction (VeP) and functional annotation (ToppGene) analyses were performed. Approaches were compared by comparing read depth, overlap of SNP detection results, and following SNP annotation for positional candidate genes. On average, total reads detected for Approach i) individual liver and muscle samples were 18,362,086.3 and 35,645,898.7, respectively. For Approach ii), total reads detected for each merged group of samples was 162,030,705, and for Approach iii) was 324,061,410, revealing the highest read depth. Additionally, Approach iii) encompassed the majority of localized positional genes detected by each approach, suggesting Approach iii) be applied to maximize detection power, read depth, and accuracy of SNP calling, therefore increasing confidence of variant detection and reducing false positive rate. Approach iii) was used to detect unique SNPs fixed within low- (12,145) and high-RFI (14,663) groups. Annotation of moderate to high functional impact SNPs revealed co-localized positional candidate genes for each RFI group (2,886 for low-RFI, 3,075 for high-RFI), which were significantly (P<0.05) associated with immune and metabolism pathways. The most optimized RNA-Seq pipeline allowed for more accurate identification of SNP, associated positional candidate genes, and associated metabolic pathways in muscle and liver tissues, providing insight on the genetic architecture of feed efficiency in beef cattle.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.378
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.236
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square (Research Square)Same topicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestockFrench-language works237,207