MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407667681 · doi:10.1080/07366205.2025.2457887

RNA extraction and RNA-sequencing method for transcriptomic analysis of <i>Mycobacterium tuberculosis</i>

2025· article· en· W4407667681 on OpenAlexafffund
Morgan R. Hiebert, Meenu K. Sharma, Alwyn C. Go, Christine Bonner, Vanessa Laminman, Morag Graham, Hafid Soualhine

Bibliographic record

VenueBioTechniques · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMycobacterium research and diagnosis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaPublic Health Agency of Canada
FundersManitoba Lung AssociationPublic Health Agency of CanadaResearch Manitoba
KeywordsRNA extractionRNAMycobacterium tuberculosisTranscriptomeBiologyComputational biologyTuberculosisGeneticsMicrobiologyMolecular biologyGeneGene expressionMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RNA-sequencing (RNA-seq) technologies have advanced exponentially in recent years, however, the application of RNA-seq to Mycobacterium tuberculosis remains limited. We present a wet-lab and computational protocol for RNA-seq based transcriptomics that was tested on 12 replicates each of 11 clinical isolates of M. tuberculosis (n = 132) grown in vitro with and without pyrazinamide exposure. This RNA extraction method uses low-volume cultures, mechanical lysis, TRIzol™ phase separation, and column-based purification to produce high yields of pure, intact RNA followed by rRNA depletion and cDNA library preparation. The detection of unique transcripts was optimized at a sequencing depth of 15 million reads. This method detected differential RNA expression in experimental sets with and without pyrazinamide exposure, demonstrating that the method is suitable for RNA-seq applications.

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)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.340 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioTechniquesSame topicMycobacterium research and diagnosisFrench-language works237,207