ArticlePloS one2011
Comparing de novo genome assembly: the long and short of it.
Article in PloS one, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
58 citing papers in PubMed.
- Benchmarking genome assemblers for four bacterial models based on contiguity, correctness, and completeness.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- De Novo transcriptome assembly of Diaprepes abbreviatus: foundations for functional genomics and targeted pest management.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- Variation of and associations with the depth and evenness of sequencing coverage in archived plastid genomes.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Variation of and associations with the depth and evenness of sequencing coverage in archived plastid genomes.Research square · 2025Article
- CompàreGenome: a command-line tool for genomic diversity estimation in prokaryotes and eukaryotes.BMC bioinformatics · 2025Article
- Classification of and detection techniques for RNAi-induced effects in GM plants.Frontiers in plant science · 2025Review
- Theoretical Analysis of Sequencing Bioinformatics Algorithms and Beyond.Communications of the ACM · 2023Article
- Evolutionary Genome Mining for the Discovery and Engineering of Natural Product Biosynthesis.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022Article
- Physiological and Genomic Analysis ofMicroorganisms · 2021Article
- Multi-model seascape genomics identifies distinct environmental drivers of selection among sympatric marine species.BMC evolutionary biology · 2020Article
- Using long and linked reads to improve an Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus) genome assembly.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Re-sequencing and optical mapping reveals misassemblies and real inversions on Corynebacterium pseudotuberculosis genomes.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Metagenomic assembly through the lens of validation: recent advances in assessing and improving the quality of genomes assembled from metagenomes.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2019Article
- SRAssembler: Selective Recursive local Assembly of homologous genomic regions.BMC bioinformatics · 2019Article
- Essential guidelines for computational method benchmarking.Genome biology · 2019Review
- GMASS: a novel measure for genome assembly structural similarity.BMC bioinformatics · 2019Article
- Current Strategies of Polyploid Plant Genome Sequence Assembly.Frontiers in plant science · 2018Review
- A comparative evaluation of genome assembly reconciliation tools.Genome biology · 2017Article
- The next generation of target capture technologies - large DNA fragment enrichment and sequencing determines regional genomic variation of high complexity.BMC genomics · 2016Article
- Exploration of the Drosophila buzzatii transposable element content suggests underestimation of repeats in Drosophila genomes.BMC genomics · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent advances in DNA sequencing technology and their focal role in Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS) have rekindled a growing interest in the whole-genome sequence assembly (WGSA) problem, thereby, inundating the field with a plethora of new formalizations, algorithms, heuristics and implementations. And yet, scant attention has been paid to comparative assessments of these assemblers' quality and accuracy. No commonly accepted and standardized method for comparison exists yet. Even worse, widely used metrics to compare the assembled sequences emphasize only size, poorly capturing the contig quality and accuracy. This paper addresses these concerns: it highlights common anomalies in assembly accuracy through a rigorous study of several assemblers, compared under both standard metrics (N50, coverage, contig sizes, etc.) as well as a more comprehensive metric (Feature-Response Curves, FRC) that is introduced here; FRC transparently captures the trade-offs between contigs' quality against their sizes. For this purpose, most of the publicly available major sequence assemblers--both for low-coverage long (Sanger) and high-coverage short (Illumina) reads technologies--are compared. These assemblers are applied to microbial (Escherichia coli, Brucella, Wolbachia, Staphylococcus, Helicobacter) and partial human genome sequences (Chr. Y), using sequence reads of various read-lengths, coverages, accuracies, and with and without mate-pairs. It is hoped that, based on these evaluations, computational biologists will identify innovative sequence assembly paradigms, bioinformaticists will determine promising approaches for developing "next-generation" assemblers, and biotechnologists will formulate more meaningful design desiderata for sequencing technology platforms. A new software tool for computing the FRC metric has been developed and is available through the AMOS open-source consortium.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.