MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317792330 · doi:10.1101/2023.01.23.524574

Novel Pipeline for Large-Scale Comparative Population Genetics

2023· preprint· en· W4317792330 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Samantha Majoros, Sarah J. Adamowicz, Karl Cottenie

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicDiptera species taxonomy and behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGenome Canada
KeywordsBiologyPopulationPopulation geneticsGenetic structureTaxonEvolutionary biologyPipeline (software)EcologyGenetic variationGeneticsGeneComputer scienceDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract As scientists continue to ask complex questions about biodiversity and deal with increasingly large amounts of data, there is a demand for new methods and computational developments to perform scientific analyses. Analytical pipelines and modules can provide a way to meet these demands and ensure reproducibility in scientific methods and analyses. The goal of this study was to create efficient, reproducible, reusable programming modules that are publicly available for future research. These modules were used to determine population genetic structure measures and compare these measures across species with different biological traits. The functionality of the modules is shown through a case study on Diptera (true fly) species from Canada and Greenland. We leveraged high-throughput DNA sequencing data from Northern areas, as it is a valuable resource and provides new opportunities to study the Arctic. Data were pulled from public databases (Barcode of Life Data System and Global Biodiversity Information Facility), as well as taxon-specific literature. The pipeline we developed in R includes fifteen modules, including modules to prepare and filter the data, calculate population genetic structure measures (e.g., F ST ), and run a multiple regression. These modules can be easily adapted and applied to a diverse set of animal groups, geographic regions, and biological traits. Best practices were followed for pipeline development, and the modules were designed and tested to work for datasets of different sizes by providing multiple different analyses and filtering options. Biological results were also obtained for Diptera species. Habitat and larval diet were both significantly related to population genetic structure. Evidence of isolation by distance and a relationship between population genetic structure and both latitude and longitude were also found. Overall, this study has created efficient, reusable bioinformatics modules, and provided insight into the factors affecting population genetic structure in Northern fly communities. Author Summary The goal of our study is to provide researchers with a series of R programming modules that can be used to determine how genetically different populations of the same species are and see how these differences are influenced by biological traits of the species and other variables. The scripts provided are flexible, accessible, and provide researchers with a useful tool for answering questions about population genetics and dealing with large amounts of DNA sequencing data. To show the functionality of the modules, we performed a case study using fly species from Canada and Greenland. We chose to focus on Northern regions as these areas are undergoing significant changes, and as the climate shifts, so will Northern species communities and compositions. Our study revealed that habitat and larval diet were both significantly related to population genetic structure. We also found evidence of isolation by distance, suggesting that populations that are further apart are less genetically similar, as well as relationships with latitude and longitude. Through this study we not only provided some insight into the factors influencing population genetic structure in Northern fly communities but also provided efficient and reusable R programming modules that can be used by other researchers.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.013

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.193 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicDiptera species taxonomy and behaviorFrench-language works237,207