Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35295949›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in genetics2022

Metagenomic Geolocation Using Read Signatures.

Timothy Chappell, Shlomo Geva, James M Hogan, David Lovell, Andrew Trotman, Dimitri Perrin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Timothy ChappellSchool of Computer Science, Faculty of Science, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Shlomo GevaSchool of Computer Science, Faculty of Science, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
James M HoganSchool of Computer Science, Faculty of Science, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
David LovellSchool of Computer Science, Faculty of Science, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Andrew TrotmanDepartment of Computer Science, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Dimitri PerrinSchool of Computer Science, Faculty of Science, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We present a novel approach to the Metagenomic Geolocation Challenge based on random projection of the sample reads from each location. This approach explores the direct use of k-mer composition to characterise samples so that we can avoid the computationally demanding step of aligning reads to available microbial reference sequences. Each variable-length read is converted into a fixed-length, k-mer-based read signature. Read signatures are then clustered into location signatures which provide a more compact characterisation of the reads at each location. Classification is then treated as a problem in ranked retrieval of locations, where signature similarity is used as a measure of similarity in microbial composition. We evaluate our approach using the CAMDA 2020 Challenge dataset and obtain promising results based on nearest neighbour classification. The main findings of this study are that k-mer representations carry sufficient information to reveal the origin of many of the CAMDA 2020 Challenge metagenomic samples, and that this reference-free approach can be achieved with much less computation than methods that need reads to be assigned to operational taxonomic units-advantages which become clear through comparison to previously published work on the CAMDA 2019 Challenge data.

Indexed as

classificationgeolocationk-mermetagenomicssignatures

Identifiers

PMID35295949
PMCPMC8918732

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.