MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6929654051 · doi:10.5061/dryad.k0p2ngf7w

Haploid, diploid, and pooled exome capture recapitulate features of biology and paralogy in two non-model tree species

2021· dataset· en· W6929654051 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueDRYAD · 2021
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral and Psychological Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExomeGenomeExome sequencingPopulationPopulation geneticsTree of life (biology)Phylogenetic treeAllele frequencyGenomicsPhylogenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite their suitability for studying evolution, many conifer species have large and repetitive giga-genomes (16-31Gbp) that create hurdles to producing high coverage SNP datasets that capture diversity from across the entirety of the genome. Due in part to multiple ancient whole genome duplication events, gene family expansion and subsequent evolution within Pinaceae, false diversity from the misalignment of paralog copies creates further challenges in accurately and reproducibly inferring evolutionary history from sequence data. Here, we leverage the cost-saving benefits of pool-seq and exome-capture to discover SNPs in two conifer species, Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii (Mirb.) Franco, Pinaceae) and jack pine (Pinus banksiana Lamb., Pinaceae). We show, using minimal baseline filtering, that allele frequencies estimated from pooled individuals show a strong positive correlation with those estimated by sequencing the same population as individuals (r > 0.948), on par with such comparisons made in model organisms. Further, we highlight the utility of haploid megagametophyte tissue for identifying sites that are likely due to misaligned paralogs. Together with additional minor filtering, we show that it is possible to remove many of the loci with large frequency estimate discrepancies between individual and pooled sequencing approaches, improving the correlation further (r > 0.973). Our work addresses bioinformatic challenges in non-model organisms with large and complex genomes, highlights the use of megagametophyte tissue for the identification of paralog sites, and suggests the combination of pool-seq and exome capture to be robust for further evolutionary hypothesis testing in these systems.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDRYADSame topicBehavioral and Psychological StudiesFrench-language works237,207