Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20333186›Full record

ArticleGenome biology and evolution2009

Efficient sampling of parsimonious inversion histories with application to genome rearrangement in Yersinia.

István Miklós, Aaron E Darling

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome biology and evolution, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

István MiklósBioinformatics group, Alfréd Rényi Institute of Mathematics, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, Hungary. miklosi@renyi.hu
Aaron E Darling
Alfréd Rényi Institute of Mathematics · HUUniversity of California, Davis · US

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/C509566/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Inversions are among the most common mutations acting on the order and orientation of genes in a genome, and polynomial-time algorithms exist to obtain a minimal length series of inversions that transform one genome arrangement to another. However, the minimum length series of inversions (the optimal sorting path) is often not unique as many such optimal sorting paths exist. If we assume that all optimal sorting paths are equally likely, then statistical inference on genome arrangement history must account for all such sorting paths and not just a single estimate. No deterministic polynomial algorithm is known to count the number of optimal sorting paths nor sample from the uniform distribution of optimal sorting paths. Here, we propose a stochastic method that uniformly samples the set of all optimal sorting paths. Our method uses a novel formulation of parallel Markov chain Monte Carlo. In practice, our method can quickly estimate the total number of optimal sorting paths. We introduce a variant of our approach in which short inversions are modeled to be more likely, and we show how the method can be used to estimate the distribution of inversion lengths and breakpoint usage in pathogenic Yersinia pestis. The proposed method has been implemented in a program called "MC4Inversion." We draw comparison of MC4Inversion to the sampler implemented in BADGER and a previously described importance sampling (IS) technique. We find that on high-divergence data sets, MC4Inversion finds more optimal sorting paths per second than BADGER and the IS technique and simultaneously avoids bias inherent in the IS technique.

Indexed as

genome rearrangementinversionMCMCYersinia

Identifiers

PMID20333186
PMCPMC2817410
OpenAlexW2120283259

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.