ArticlePloS one2016
Comparison of De Novo Transcriptome Assemblers and k-mer Strategies Using the Killifish, Fundulus heteroclitus.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 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
24 citing papers in PubMed.
- De novo assembly of plasmodium interspersed repeat (pir) genes from Plasmodium vivax RNAseq data suggests geographic conservation of sub-family transcription.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- Reexamining the Mycovirome ofViruses · 2024Article
- Article
- CMash: fast, multi-resolution estimation of k-mer-based Jaccard and containment indices.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2022Article
- Article
- Identification of Pueraria spp. through DNA barcoding and comparative transcriptomics.BMC plant biology · 2022Article
- A consensus-based ensemble approach to improve transcriptome assembly.BMC bioinformatics · 2021Article
- Comparability of reference-based and reference-free transcriptome analysis approaches at the gene expression level.BMC bioinformatics · 2021Article
- Analysis of Gene Expression Changes in Plants Grown in Salty Soil in Response to Inoculation with Halophilic Bacteria.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- De novo RNA sequencing analysis of Aeluropus littoralis halophyte plant under salinity stress.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Evaluation of Seven Different RNA-Seq Alignment Tools Based on Experimental Data from the Model PlantInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2020Article
- Transcriptome Landscape Variation in the GenusGenes · 2019Article
- De novo transcriptome assembly: A comprehensive cross-species comparison of short-read RNA-Seq assemblers.GigaScience · 2019Article
- Transcriptome and excretory-secretory proteome of infective-stage larvae of the nematode Gnathostoma spinigerum reveal potential immunodiagnostic targets for development.Parasite (Paris, France) · 2019Article
- TransFlow: a modular framework for assembling and assessing accurate de novo transcriptomes in non-model organisms.BMC bioinformatics · 2018Article
- Transcriptomic analysis of male and female Schistosoma mekongi adult worms.Parasites & vectors · 2018Article
- Review
- Evaluating the Performance of De Novo Assembly Methods for Venom-Gland Transcriptomics.Toxins · 2018Article
- Article
- Pipeline to Identify Hydroxyproline-Rich Glycoproteins.Plant physiology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDe novo assembly of non-model organism's transcriptomes has recently been on the rise in concert with the number of de novo transcriptome assembly software programs. There is a knowledge gap as to what assembler software or k-mer strategy is best for construction of an optimal de novo assembly. Additionally, there is a lack of consensus on which evaluation metrics should be used to assess the quality of de novo transcriptome assemblies.
resultSix different assembly strategies were evaluated from four different assemblers. The Trinity assembly was used in its default 25 single k-mer value while Bridger, Oases, and SOAPdenovo-Trans were performed with multiple k-mer strategies. Bridger, Oases, and SOAPdenovo-Trans used a small multiple k-mer (SMK) strategy consisting of the k-mer lengths of 21, 25, 27, 29, 31, and 33. Additionally, Oases and SOAPdenovo-Trans were performed using a large multiple k-mer (LMK) strategy consisting of k-mer lengths of 25, 35, 45, 55, 65, 75, and 85. Eleven metrics were used to evaluate each assembly strategy including three genome related evaluation metrics (contig number, N50 length, Contigs >1 kb, reads) and eight transcriptome evaluation metrics (mapped back to transcripts (RMBT), number of full length transcripts, number of open reading frames, Detonate RSEM-EVAL score, and percent alignment to the southern platyfish, Amazon molly, BUSCO and CEGMA databases). The assembly strategy that performed the best, that is it was within the top three of each evaluation metric, was the Bridger assembly (10 of 11) followed by the Oases SMK assembly (8 of 11), the Oases LMK assembly (6 of 11), the Trinity assembly (4 of 11), the SOAP LMK assembly (4 of 11), and the SOAP SMK assembly (3 of 11).
conclusionThis study provides an in-depth multi k-mer strategy investigation concluding that the assembler itself had a greater impact than k-mer size regardless of the strategy employed. Additionally, the comprehensive performance transcriptome evaluation metrics utilized in this study identified the need for choosing metrics centered on user defined research goals. Based on the evaluation metrics performed, the Bridger assembly was able to construct the best assembly of the testis transcriptome in Fundulus heteroclitus.
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.