MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Next-Generation Mapping of Genetic Mutations Using Bulk Population Sequencing

2013· article· en· W85112055 on OpenAlexaff
Ryan S. Austin, Steven P. Chatfield, Darrell Desveaux, David S. Guttman

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in molecular biology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicChromosomal and Genetic Variations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneticsBiologyPopulationLocus (genetics)MutantMutationPhenotypeReference genomeGenomeLinkage disequilibriumGeneComputational biologyAlleleHaplotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Next-generation sequencing platforms have made it possible to very rapidly map genetic mutations in Arabidopsis using whole-genome resequencing against pooled members of an F2 mapping population. In the case of recessive mutations, all individuals expressing the phenotype will be homozygous for the mutant genome at the locus responsible for the phenotype, while all other loci segregate roughly equally for both parental lines due to recombination. Importantly, genomic regions flanking the recessive mutation will be in linkage disequilibrium and therefore also be homozygous due to genetic hitchhiking. This information can be exploited to quickly and effectively identify the causal mutation. To this end, sequence data generated from members of the pooled population exhibiting the mutant phenotype are first aligned to the reference genome. Polymorphisms between the mutant and mapping line are then identified and used to determine the homozygous, nonrecombinant region harboring the mutation. Polymorphisms in the identified region are filtered to provide a short list of markers potentially responsible for the phenotype of interest, which is followed by validation at the bench. Although the focus of recent studies has been on the mapping of point mutations exhibiting recessive phenotypes, the techniques employed can be extended to incorporate more complicated scenarios such as dominant mutations and those caused by insertions or deletions in genomic sequence. This chapter describes detailed procedures for performing next-generation mapping against an Arabidopsis mutant and discusses how different mutations might be approached.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.603
Threshold uncertainty score0.350

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods in molecular biologySame topicChromosomal and Genetic VariationsFrench-language works237,207