MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

DNA barcoding on Oxford Nanopore: multiplexing up to 24 x 96-well plates v1

2023· preprint· en· W4389137435 on OpenAlexafffund
Robin Floyd, Sean W. J. Prosser

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMolecular Biology Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersGovernment of CanadaOntario GenomicsGenome Canada
KeywordsMinionNanopore sequencingMultiplexingDNA sequencerNanoporePrimer (cosmetics)IdentifierDNA barcodingProtocol (science)Computer scienceSearch engine indexingComputational biologyDNABiologyMolecular biologyDNA sequencingPhysicsNanotechnologyGeneticsInformation retrievalMaterials scienceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This protocol describes laboratory methods for sequencing a standard COI marker (i.e. DNA barcoding), multiplexing up to 2,280 specimens (24 x 96 well plates, with one negative control well per plate), to run on an Oxford Nanopore Technologies Flongle 10.4.1 Flow Cell on a MinION sequencer. All indexing is accomplished by PCR using tagged primers, meaning that library prep is only carried out in a single tube with all 2,280 PCRs pooled. This is accomplished by asymmetrical indexing, where forward primers carrying 96 Unique Molecular Identifiers (UMIs) provide mapping to a well of a 96-well plate, and reverse primers with 24 UMIs provide mapping to the plate. The protocol details all primer sequences (attached as a text table) and gives instructions for manufacturing batches of pre-made indexed plates, carrying out PCR, pooling and library prep for the ONT platform, and loading onto the sequencing device.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.149

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0440.058

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMolecular Biology Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207