ArticleBMC genomics2012
Gene fragmentation in bacterial draft genomes: extent, consequences and mitigation.
Article in BMC genomics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 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
54 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrated genomic and experimental assessment of the biosafety of Paraburkholderia sacchari as a promising microbial chassis.World journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2026Article
- Comparative genomics reveals immunomodulatory and anti-obesity traits of Lactococcus lactis subsp. lactis.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Insights into the Fucoidan and Mannitol Biosynthetic Pathways in the Brown Seaweed Padina Tetrastromatica Based on Draft Genome and Transcriptome Analysis.Marine biotechnology (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Article
- De-novo assembly of 82 bacterial genomes using Nanopore sequencing and prediction of biosynthetic capacity.Scientific data · 2026Article
- skDER and CiDDER: two scalable approaches for microbial genome dereplication.Microbial genomics · 2025Article
- Diploid chromosome-level genome assembly and annotation for Lycorma delicatula.Scientific data · 2025Article
- Context matters: assessing the impacts of genomic background and ecology on microbial biosynthetic gene cluster evolution.mSystems · 2025Review
- Comparison of Illumina and Oxford Nanopore sequencing data quality for Clostridioides difficile genome analysis and their application for epidemiological surveillance.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- zol and fai: large-scale targeted detection and evolutionary investigation of gene clusters.Nucleic acids research · 2025Article
- BonoboFlow: viral genome assembly and haplotype reconstruction from nanopore reads.Bioinformatics advances · 2025Article
- zol & fai: large-scale targeted detection and evolutionary investigation of gene clusters.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Article
- Ecology shapes the genomic and biosynthetic diversification ofMicrobial genomics · 2024Article
- Conservation of Genomic Information in Multiple Displacement Amplified Low-Quantity Metagenomic Material from Marine Invertebrates.Marine drugs · 2023Article
- Draft genomes, phylogenomic reconstruction and comparative genome analysis of threeAccess microbiology · 2023Article
- Genomic Analysis Unveils the Pervasiveness and Diversity of Prophages InfectingPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- The complete and closed genome of the facultative generalist Candidatus Endoriftia persephone from deep-sea hydrothermal vents.Molecular ecology resources · 2022Article
- Effects of Nutrient Level and Growth Rate on the Conjugation Process That Transfers Mobile Antibiotic Resistance Genes in Continuous Cultures.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2022Article
- Insights into the Antimicrobial Activities and Metabolomes ofMarine drugs · 2022Article
- Prokaryotic Genome Annotation.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022Article
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
Abstract
unlabelledOngoing technological advances in genome sequencing are allowing bacterial genomes to be sequenced at ever-lower cost. However, nearly all of these new techniques concomitantly decrease genome quality, primarily due to the inability of their relatively short read lengths to bridge certain genomic regions, e.g., those containing repeats. Fragmentation of predicted open reading frames (ORFs) is one possible consequence of this decreased quality. In this study we quantify ORF fragmentation in draft microbial genomes and its effect on annotation efficacy, and we propose a solution to ameliorate this problem.
resultsA survey of draft-quality genomes in GenBank revealed that fragmented ORFs comprised > 80% of the predicted ORFs in some genomes, and that increased fragmentation correlated with decreased genome assembly quality. In a more thorough analysis of 25 Streptomyces genomes, fragmentation was especially enriched in some protein classes with repeating, multi-modular structures such as polyketide synthases, non-ribosomal peptide synthetases and serine/threonine kinases. Overall, increased genome fragmentation correlated with increased false-negative Pfam and COG annotation rates and increased false-positive KEGG annotation rates. The false-positive KEGG annotation rate could be ameliorated by linking fragmented ORFs using their orthologs in related genomes. Whereas this strategy successfully linked up to 46% of the total ORF fragments in some genomes, its sensitivity appeared to depend heavily on the depth of sampling of a particular taxon's variable genome.
conclusionsDraft microbial genomes contain many ORF fragments. Where these correspond to the same gene they have particular potential to confound comparative gene content analyses. Given our findings, and the rapid increase in the number of microbial draft quality genomes, we suggest that accounting for gene fragmentation and its associated biases is important when designing comparative genomic projects.
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.