ArticlePloS one2013
Comparative analysis of DNA word abundances in four yeast genomes using a novel statistical background model.
Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Exploring objective feature sets in constructing the evolution relationship of animal genome sequences.BMC genomics · 2023Article
- Intrinsic laws of k-mer spectra of genome sequences and evolution mechanism of genomes.BMC evolutionary biology · 2020Article
- Evolutionary mechanism and biological functions of 8-mers containing CG dinucleotide in yeast.Chromosome research : an international journal on the molecular, supramolecular and evolutionary aspects of chromosome biology · 2017Article
- Determining the quality and complexity of next-generation sequencing data without a reference genome.Genome biology · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous studies have shown that the identification and analysis of both abundant and rare k-mers or "DNA words of length k" in genomic sequences using suitable statistical background models can reveal biologically significant sequence elements. Other studies have investigated the uni/multimodal distribution of k-mer abundances or "k-mer spectra" in different DNA sequences. However, the existing background models are affected to varying extents by compositional bias. Moreover, the distribution of k-mer abundances in the context of related genomes has not been studied previously. Here, we present a novel statistical background model for calculating k-mer enrichment in DNA sequences based on the average of the frequencies of the two (k-1) mers for each k-mer. Comparison of our null model with the commonly used ones, including Markov models of different orders and the single mismatch model, shows that our method is more robust to compositional AT-rich bias and detects many additional, repeat-poor over-abundant k-mers that are biologically meaningful. Analysis of overrepresented genomic k-mers (4≤k≤16) from four yeast species using this model showed that the fraction of overrepresented DNA words falls linearly as k increases; however, a significant number of overabundant k-mers exists at higher values of k. Finally, comparative analysis of k-mer abundance scores across four yeast species revealed a mixture of unimodal and multimodal spectra for the various genomic sub-regions analyzed.
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.