Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21718539›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2011

Improving pan-genome annotation using whole genome multiple alignment.

Samuel V Angiuoli, Julie C Dunning Hotopp, Steven L Salzberg, Hervé Tettelin

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Evolution ofVirulence · 2023
    Article
  3. Microbial genomics · 2023
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Efficient merging of genome profile alignments.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2019
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2018
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Molecular epidemiology and genomics of group A Streptococcus.Infection, genetics and evolution : journal of molecular epidemiology and evolutionary genetics in infectious diseases · 2015
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Samuel V AngiuoliCenter for Bioinformatics and Computational Biology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA. angiuoli@umiacs.umd.edu
Julie C Dunning Hotopp
Steven L Salzberg
Hervé Tettelin
University of Maryland, Baltimore · USUniversity of Maryland, College Park · US

Funding

Computational Methods for Genome Assembly, Transcript Assembly, and Variant DiscoveryR01HG006677 · NHGRI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI SALZBERG, STEVEN L. · 2011 to 2025
$10.7M
Alignment Software for Second-Generation SequencingR01HG006102 · NHGRI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI SALZBERG, STEVEN L. · 2011 to 2014
$2.2M
Bioinformatics Software for Analyzing Microbial GenomesR01GM083873 · NIGMS · UNIV OF MARYLAND, COLLEGE PARK · PI SALZBERG, STEVEN L. · 2008 to 2017
$2.1M
NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG006102NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG006677NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM083873NIGMS NIH HHS R01-GM083873
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRapid annotation and comparisons of genomes from multiple isolates (pan-genomes) is becoming commonplace due to advances in sequencing technology. Genome annotations can contain inconsistencies and errors that hinder comparative analysis even within a single species. Tools are needed to compare and improve annotation quality across sets of closely related genomes.

resultsWe introduce a new tool, Mugsy-Annotator, that identifies orthologs and evaluates annotation quality in prokaryotic genomes using whole genome multiple alignment. Mugsy-Annotator identifies anomalies in annotated gene structures, including inconsistently located translation initiation sites and disrupted genes due to draft genome sequencing or pseudogenes. An evaluation of species pan-genomes using the tool indicates that such anomalies are common, especially at translation initiation sites. Mugsy-Annotator reports alternate annotations that improve consistency and are candidates for further review.

conclusionsWhole genome multiple alignment can be used to efficiently identify orthologs and annotation problem areas in a bacterial pan-genome. Comparisons of annotated gene structures within a species may show more variation than is actually present in the genome, indicating errors in genome annotation. Our new tool Mugsy-Annotator assists re-annotation efforts by highlighting edits that improve annotation consistency.

Indexed as

Genome, BacterialMolecular Sequence AnnotationBacteriaChromosome MappingSequence Alignment

Identifiers

PMID21718539
PMCPMC3142524
OpenAlexW2149109523

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.