↓ Skip to main content

Semi-supervised machine learning for automated species identification by collagen peptide mass fingerprinting

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Semi-supervised machine learning for automated species identification by collagen peptide mass fingerprinting
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12859-018-2221-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Muxin Gu, Michael Buckley

Abstract

Biomolecular methods for species identification are increasingly being utilised in the study of changing environments, both at the microscopic and macroscopic levels. High-throughput peptide mass fingerprinting has been largely applied to bacterial identification, but increasingly used to identify archaeological and palaeontological skeletal material to yield information on past environments and human-animal interaction. However, as applications move away from predominantly domesticate and the more abundant wild fauna to a much wider range of less common taxa that do not yet have genetically-derived sequence information, robust methods of species identification and biomarker selection need to be determined. Here we developed a supervised machine learning algorithm for classifying the species of ancient remains based on collagen fingerprinting. The aim was to minimise requirements on prior knowledge of known species while yielding satisfactory sensitivity and specificity. The algorithm uses iterations of a modified random forest classifier with a similarity scoring system to expand its identified samples. We tested it on a set of 6805 spectra and found that a high level of accuracy can be achieved with a training set of five identified specimens per taxon. This method consistently achieves higher accuracy than two-dimensional principal component analysis and similar accuracy with hierarchical clustering using optimised parameters, which greatly reduces requirements for human input. Within the vertebrata, we demonstrate that this method was able to achieve the taxonomic resolution of family or sub-family level whereas the genus- or species-level identification may require manual interpretation or further experiments. In addition, it also identifies additional species biomarkers than those previously published.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 22%
Student > Bachelor 8 16%
Student > Master 6 12%
Researcher 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 10 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 6 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 8%
Arts and Humanities 4 8%
Other 12 24%
Unknown 14 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 February 2019.
All research outputs
#18,171,423
of 23,344,526 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#6,065
of 7,387 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#239,042
of 329,796 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#75
of 99 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,344,526 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,387 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,796 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 99 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.