An optimized toolkit for high-molecular-weight DNA extraction and ultra-long-read nanopore sequencing using glass beads and hexamminecobalt(III) chloride
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the advent of long-read sequencing, achieving longer read lengths has been a key goal for many users. Ultra-long-read sets (N50 ≥ 100 kb) produced from Oxford Nanopore sequencers have improved genome assemblies in recent years. However, despite progress in extraction protocols and library preparation methods, ultra-long sequencing remains challenging for many sample types. Here, we compare various methods and introduce the FindingNemo protocol that: (1) optimizes ultra-high-molecular-weight (UHMW) DNA extraction and library cleanup by using glass beads and hexamminecobalt(III) chloride (CoHex), (2) can deliver high ultra-long sequencing yield of >20 Gb of reads from a single MinION flow cell or >100 Gb from PromethION devices (R9.4-R10.4 pore variants), and (3) is scalable to using fewer input cells or lower DNA amounts, with extraction to sequencing possible in a single working day. By comparison, we demonstrate that this protocol surpasses previous methods by enabling precise determination of input DNA quantity and quality through cell counting, sample dilution, and homogenization techniques.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".