MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319265422 · doi:10.1186/s13007-023-00990-7

3D-GBS: a universal genotyping-by-sequencing approach for genomic selection and other high-throughput low-cost applications in species with small to medium-sized genomes

2023· article· en· W4319265422 on OpenAlexafffund
Maxime de Ronne, Gaétan Légaré, François Belzile, Brian Boyle, Davoud Torkamaneh

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Methods · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersGovernment of CanadaUniversité LavalGrain Farmers of OntarioGénome QuébecCanadian Field Crop Research AllianceGenome Canada
KeywordsGenotypingThroughputSelection (genetic algorithm)GenomeGenomic selectionComputational biologyBiologyDNA sequencingGeneticsComputer scienceGenotypeDNAGeneSingle-nucleotide polymorphismOperating systemArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the increased efficiency of sequencing technologies and the development of reduced-representation sequencing (RRS) approaches allowing high-throughput sequencing (HTS) of multiplexed samples, the per-sample genotyping cost remains the most limiting factor in the context of large-scale studies. For example, in the context of genomic selection (GS), breeders need genome-wide markers to predict the breeding value of large cohorts of progenies, requiring the genotyping of thousands candidates. Here, we introduce 3D-GBS, an optimized GBS procedure, to provide an ultra-high-throughput and ultra-low-cost genotyping solution for species with small to medium-sized genome and illustrate its use in soybean. Using a combination of three restriction enzymes (PstI/NsiI/MspI), the portion of the genome that is captured was reduced fourfold (compared to a "standard" ApeKI-based protocol) while reducing the number of markers by only 40%. By better focusing the sequencing effort on limited set of restriction fragments, fourfold more samples can be genotyped at the same minimal depth of coverage. This GBS protocol also resulted in a lower proportion of missing data and provided a more uniform distribution of SNPs across the genome. Moreover, we investigated the optimal number of reads per sample needed to obtain an adequate number of markers for GS and QTL mapping (500-1000 markers per biparental cross). This optimization allows sequencing costs to be decreased by ~ 92% and ~ 86% for GS and QTL mapping studies, respectively, compared to previously published work. Overall, 3D-GBS represents a unique and affordable solution for applications requiring extremely high-throughput genotyping where cost remains the most limiting factor.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations24
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant MethodsSame topicGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and AnimalsFrench-language works237,207