MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402641217 · doi:10.3390/cimb46090620

RNA Sequencing of Sperm from Healthy Cattle and Horses Reveals the Presence of a Large Bacterial Population

2024· review· en· W4402641217 on OpenAlexaff
Paula Navarrete-López, Victoria Asselstine, María Maroto, Marta Lombó, Ángela Cánovas, Alfonso Gutiérrez‐Adán

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Issues in Molecular Biology · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSperm and Testicular Function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersMinisterio de Ciencia e Innovación
KeywordsTranscriptomeBiologyRNASpermRNA-SeqGeneticsGenomeRibosomal RNAComputational biologyGeneGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RNA molecules within ejaculated sperm can be characterized through whole-transcriptome sequencing, enabling the identification of pivotal transcripts that may influence reproductive success. However, the profiling of sperm transcriptomes through next-generation sequencing has several limitations impairing the identification of functional transcripts. In this study, we explored the nature of the RNA sequences present in the sperm transcriptome of two livestock species, cattle and horses, using RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) technology. Through processing of transcriptomic data derived from bovine and equine sperm cell preparations, low mapping rates to the reference genomes were observed, mainly attributed to the presence of ribosomal RNA and bacteria in sperm samples, which led to a reduced sequencing depth of RNAs of interest. To explore the presence of bacteria, we aligned the unmapped reads to a complete database of bacterial genomes and identified bacteria-associated transcripts which were characterized. This analysis examines the limitations associated with sperm transcriptome profiling by reporting the nature of the RNA sequences among which bacterial RNA was found. These findings can aid researchers in understanding spermatozoal RNA-seq data and pave the way for the identification of molecular markers of sperm performance.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.897
Threshold uncertainty score0.562

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.355 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Issues in Molecular BiologySame topicSperm and Testicular FunctionFrench-language works237,207