Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23556006›Full record

ArticlePloS one2013

CISA: contig integrator for sequence assembly of bacterial genomes.

Shin-Hung Lin, Yu-Chieh Liao

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 167 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
167citing 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

167 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Genomic Characterization and Taxonomic Classification ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Draft genome sequence of the basidiomycetous yeastMicrobiology resource announcements · 2026
    Article
  5. Genomic Evolution ofMicroorganisms · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Draft genome sequences of threeMicrobiology resource announcements · 2026
    Article
  8. Draft genome of Mn(II)-oxidizing bacteriumMicrobiology resource announcements · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Draft genome ofMicrobiology resource announcements · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Comparative genomics-based insights intoApplied and environmental microbiology · 2025
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

107 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.

Shin-Hung LinDivision of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Institute of Population Health Sciences, National Health Research Institutes, Zhunan, Taiwan.
Yu-Chieh Liao

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A plethora of algorithmic assemblers have been proposed for the de novo assembly of genomes, however, no individual assembler guarantees the optimal assembly for diverse species. Optimizing various parameters in an assembler is often performed in order to generate the most optimal assembly. However, few efforts have been pursued to take advantage of multiple assemblies to yield an assembly of high accuracy. In this study, we employ various state-of-the-art assemblers to generate different sets of contigs for bacterial genomes. A tool, named CISA, has been developed to integrate the assemblies into a hybrid set of contigs, resulting in assemblies of superior contiguity and accuracy, compared with the assemblies generated by the state-of-the-art assemblers and the hybrid assemblies merged by existing tools. This tool is implemented in Python and requires MUMmer and BLAST+ to be installed on the local machine. The source code of CISA and examples of its use are available at http://sb.nhri.org.tw/CISA/.

Indexed as

Genome, BacterialAlgorithmsContig MappingEscherichia coliHaloferax volcaniiSoftwareStaphylococcus aureus

Identifiers

PMID23556006
PMCPMC3610655

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.