MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Preparing multiplexed 16S rRNA gene amplicons (with fusion primers) for the Illumina MiSeq v1

2024· article· W7118167663 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Colleen Kellogg, rute.carvalho Carvalho, C. R. M. Prentice, Kristin Meagher Robinson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicrobial Community Ecology and Physiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmpliconAdapter (computing)Illumina dye sequencingAmplicon sequencingPrimer (cosmetics)DNA sequencingProtocol (science)16S ribosomal RNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The following protocol is for the generation of paired-end sequencing reads of 16S rRNA gene (V4 or V4V5) amplicons with dual barcodes (i.e.: “indexes”) on the Illumina MiSeq machine using v3 600 cycle chemistry. We use this protocol to make MiSeq libraries from DNA extracted from a variety of environmental samples, including seawater, freshwater, and swabs from hosts or surfaces of interest. This protocol is modified from dx.doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.4r3l277k3g1y/v1 and makes use of 'fusion' primers or PCR primers that include not only the primer sequence, but also the Illumina adapter and Nextera index. This allows samples to be indexed for amplicon sequencing using a single PCR rather than using a two-step PCR approach described here. Many thanks to André Comeau and the Integrated Microbiome Resource at Dalhousie University for so clearly describing methods and allowing for reproducibility. The resources provided here https://github.com/LangilleLab/microbiome_helper/wiki and in their publication https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/msystems.00127-16 were instrumental in developing our in-house protocols. Note: This protocol leverages combinatorial dual indexes. For other Illumina instruments (e.g. NextSeq), unique dual indexes may improve data quality and reduce index hopping. For a bit more information about the difference between unique dual indexes and combinatorial dual indexes, check out this resource. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us!

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0430.064

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMicrobial Community Ecology and Physiology→French-language works237,207→