Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25793877›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Transcriptome assembly, gene annotation and tissue gene expression atlas of the rainbow trout.

Mohamed Salem, Bam Paneru, Rafet Al-Tobasei, Fatima Abdouni, Gary H Thorgaard, Caird E Rexroad, Jianbo Yao

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing 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

34 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Characterization and complexity of transcriptome in Gymnocypris przewalskii using single-molecule long-read sequencing and RNA-seq.DNA research : an international journal for rapid publication of reports on genes and genomes · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  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

7 authors.

Mohamed SalemDepartment of Biology, Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 37132, United States of America.
Bam PaneruDepartment of Biology, Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 37132, United States of America.
Rafet Al-TobaseiDepartment of Biology, Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 37132, United States of America.
Fatima AbdouniDepartment of Biology, Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 37132, United States of America.
Gary H ThorgaardSchool of Biological Sciences and Center for Reproductive Biology, Washington State University, Pullman, Washington 99164, United States of America.
Caird E RexroadThe National Center for Cool and Cold Water Aquaculture, USDA Agricultural Research Service, Leetown, West Virginia 25430, United States of America.
Jianbo YaoDivision of Animal and Nutritional Sciences, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, 26506, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Efforts to obtain a comprehensive genome sequence for rainbow trout are ongoing and will be complemented by transcriptome information that will enhance genome assembly and annotation. Previously, transcriptome reference sequences were reported using data from different sources. Although the previous work added a great wealth of sequences, a complete and well-annotated transcriptome is still needed. In addition, gene expression in different tissues was not completely addressed in the previous studies. In this study, non-normalized cDNA libraries were sequenced from 13 different tissues of a single doubled haploid rainbow trout from the same source used for the rainbow trout genome sequence. A total of ~1.167 billion paired-end reads were de novo assembled using the Trinity RNA-Seq assembler yielding 474,524 contigs > 500 base-pairs. Of them, 287,593 had homologies to the NCBI non-redundant protein database. The longest contig of each cluster was selected as a reference, yielding 44,990 representative contigs. A total of 4,146 contigs (9.2%), including 710 full-length sequences, did not match any mRNA sequences in the current rainbow trout genome reference. Mapping reads to the reference genome identified an additional 11,843 transcripts not annotated in the genome. A digital gene expression atlas revealed 7,678 housekeeping and 4,021 tissue-specific genes. Expression of about 16,000-32,000 genes (35-71% of the identified genes) accounted for basic and specialized functions of each tissue. White muscle and stomach had the least complex transcriptomes, with high percentages of their total mRNA contributed by a small number of genes. Brain, testis and intestine, in contrast, had complex transcriptomes, with a large numbers of genes involved in their expression patterns. This study provides comprehensive de novo transcriptome information that is suitable for functional and comparative genomics studies in rainbow trout, including annotation of the genome.

Indexed as

Gene Expression ProfilingMolecular Sequence AnnotationAlternative SplicingAnimalsBase SequenceCichlidsContig MappingDNA, ComplementaryGene LibraryGene OntologyGenes, EssentialGenomeHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingOncorhynchus mykissOrgan SpecificityRNA, MessengerDNA, ComplementaryRNA, Messenger

Identifiers

PMID25793877
PMCPMC4368115

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.