A method to correct for local alterations in DNA copy number that bias functional genomics assays applied to antibiotic-treated bacteria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Functional genomics techniques, such as transposon insertion sequencing and RNA-sequencing, are key to studying relative differences in bacterial mutant fitness or gene expression under selective conditions. However, certain stress conditions, mutations, or antibiotics can directly interfere with DNA synthesis, resulting in systematic changes in local DNA copy numbers along the chromosome. This can lead to artifacts in sequencing-based functional genomics data when comparing antibiotic treatment to an unstressed control. Further, relative differences in gene-wise read counts may result from alterations in chromosomal replication dynamics, rather than selection or direct gene regulation. We term this artifact “chromosomal location bias” and implement a principled statistical approach to correct it by calculating local normalization factors along the chromosome. These normalization factors are then directly incorporated into statistical analyses using standard RNA-sequencing analysis methods without modifying the read counts themselves, preserving important information about the mean-variance relationship in the data. We illustrate the utility of this approach by generating and analyzing a ciprofloxacin-treated transposon insertion sequencing data set in Escherichia coli as a case study. We show that ciprofloxacin treatment generates chromosomal location bias in the resulting data, and we further demonstrate that failing to correct for this bias leads to false predictions of mutant drug sensitivity as measured by minimum inhibitory concentrations. We have developed an R package and user-friendly graphical Shiny application, ChromoCorrect, that detects and corrects for chromosomal bias in read count data, enabling the application of functional genomics technologies to the study of antibiotic stress. IMPORTANCE Altered gene dosage due to changes in DNA replication has been observed under a variety of stresses with a variety of experimental techniques. However, the implications of changes in gene dosage for sequencing-based functional genomics assays are rarely considered. We present a statistically principled approach to correcting for the effect of changes in gene dosage, enabling testing for differences in the fitness effects or regulation of individual genes in the presence of confounding differences in DNA copy number. We show that failing to correct for these effects can lead to incorrect predictions of resistance phenotype when applying functional genomics assays to investigate antibiotic stress, and we provide a user-friendly application to detect and correct for changes in DNA copy number.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".