MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387104490 · doi:10.1101/2023.09.26.559465

<i>In silico</i> analyses identifies sequence contamination thresholds for Nanopore-generated SARS-CoV2 sequences

2023· preprint· en· W4387104490 on OpenAlexafffund
Ayooluwa Bolaji, Ana T. Duggan

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiosensors and Analytical Detection
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Agency of Canada
FundersPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of CanadaGenome Canada
KeywordsNanopore sequencingIn silicoDNA sequencingBiologyWhole genome sequencingComputational biologyMinionGenomicsLineage (genetic)Phylogenetic treeGenomeGeneticsData miningEvolutionary biologyComputer scienceGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has brought molecular biology and genomic sequencing into the public consciousness and lexicon. With an emphasis on rapid turnaround, genomic data has been used to inform both diagnostic and surveillance decisions for the current pa ndemic at a previously unheard-of scale. The surge in the submission of genomic data to publicly-available databases has proved essential as comparing different genome sequences offers a wealth of knowledge, including phylogenetic links, modes of transmission, rates of evolution, and the impact of mutations on infection and disease severity. However, the scale of the pandemic has meant that once sequencing runs are performed, they are rarely repeated due to limited sample material and/or the availability of sequencing resources, resulting in some imperfect runs being uploaded to public repositories. As a result, it is crucial to investigate the data obtained from these imperfect runs to determine whether the results are reliable. Numerous studies have identified a variety of sources of contamination in public next-generation sequencing (NGS) data as the number of NGS studies increases along with the diversity of sequencing technologies and procedures [1–3]. For this study, we conducted an in silico experiment with known SARS-CoV-2 sequences produced from Oxford Nanopore Technologies sequencing to investigate the effect of contamination on lineage calls and single nucleotide variations (SNVs). Through a series of analyses, we identified a contamination threshold below which runs are expected to generate accurate lineage calls and maintain genomic sequence integrity. Together, these findings provide a benchmark below which imperfect runs may be considered robust for reporting results to both stakeholders and public repositories and reduce the need for repeat or wasted runs. Author Summary Large-scale genomic comparisons provide a wealth of knowledge, including modes of transmission, rates of evolution, and the impact of mutations on infection, disease severity, and treatment effectiveness. As a result, the public release of genomic data has proven to be crucial. However, studies continue to show that some of the genomic data in public repositories are contaminated due to a variety of reasons. For instance, in the case of SARS-CoV-2 sequences, the pandemic prevented many sequencing runs from being repeated, resulting in some imperfect runs being uploaded to public repositories. It is of note that when genomic data is contaminated, both scientific decisions/studies and public health measures may be compromised. To identify genome contamination threshold(s) for SARS-CoV-2 sequences generated by Nanopore sequencing, computational biology techniques were utilized to generate artificially subsampled contaminated genomes. This is the first study of its kind and so our hope is that the results obtained provide a starting point for the investigation of reporting contamination of NGS data.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.233 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicBiosensors and Analytical DetectionFrench-language works237,207