Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22192575›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2011

MAKER2: an annotation pipeline and genome-database management tool for second-generation genome projects.

Carson Holt, Mark Yandell

Abstract 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 1,330 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1,330citing 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

1,330 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Chromosome-Level Genome Assembly ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  6. Genome Assembly and Genomic Characterization ofJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

1,270 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Carson HoltEccles Institute of Human Genetics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah 84112, USA.
Mark Yandell

Funding

TRAINING PROGRAM IN GENETICST32GM007464 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI GRUNWALD, DAVID J., STANFIELD, GILLIAN · 1985 to 2020
$6.1M
Software for the creation and quality control of genome annotationsR01HG004694 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI YANDELL, MARK DOUGLAS · 2008 to 2011
$2.2M
NHGRI NIH HHS R01-HG004694NIGMS NIH HHS T32-GM007464
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSecond-generation sequencing technologies are precipitating major shifts with regards to what kinds of genomes are being sequenced and how they are annotated. While the first generation of genome projects focused on well-studied model organisms, many of today's projects involve exotic organisms whose genomes are largely terra incognita. This complicates their annotation, because unlike first-generation projects, there are no pre-existing 'gold-standard' gene-models with which to train gene-finders. Improvements in genome assembly and the wide availability of mRNA-seq data are also creating opportunities to update and re-annotate previously published genome annotations. Today's genome projects are thus in need of new genome annotation tools that can meet the challenges and opportunities presented by second-generation sequencing technologies.

resultsWe present MAKER2, a genome annotation and data management tool designed for second-generation genome projects. MAKER2 is a multi-threaded, parallelized application that can process second-generation datasets of virtually any size. We show that MAKER2 can produce accurate annotations for novel genomes where training-data are limited, of low quality or even non-existent. MAKER2 also provides an easy means to use mRNA-seq data to improve annotation quality; and it can use these data to update legacy annotations, significantly improving their quality. We also show that MAKER2 can evaluate the quality of genome annotations, and identify and prioritize problematic annotations for manual review.

conclusionsMAKER2 is the first annotation engine specifically designed for second-generation genome projects. MAKER2 scales to datasets of any size, requires little in the way of training data, and can use mRNA-seq data to improve annotation quality. It can also update and manage legacy genome annotation datasets.

Indexed as

Databases, GeneticSoftwareAnimalsGenomeHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansMolecular Sequence AnnotationPlants

Identifiers

PMID22192575
PMCPMC3280279

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.