ArticlePeerJ2016
Deconvoluting simulated metagenomes: the performance of hard- and soft- clustering algorithms applied to metagenomic chromosome conformation capture (3C).
Article in PeerJ, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- HiCBin: binning metagenomic contigs and recovering metagenome-assembled genomes using Hi-C contact maps.Genome biology · 2022Article
- bin3C: exploiting Hi-C sequencing data to accurately resolve metagenome-assembled genomes.Genome biology · 2019Article
- CAMISIM: simulating metagenomes and microbial communities.Microbiome · 2019Article
- Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChromosome conformation capture, coupled with high throughput DNA sequencing in protocols like Hi-C and 3C-seq, has been proposed as a viable means of generating data to resolve the genomes of microorganisms living in naturally occuring environments. Metagenomic Hi-C and 3C-seq datasets have begun to emerge, but the feasibility of resolving genomes when closely related organisms (strain-level diversity) are present in the sample has not yet been systematically characterised.
methodsWe developed a computational simulation pipeline for metagenomic 3C and Hi-C sequencing to evaluate the accuracy of genomic reconstructions at, above, and below an operationally defined species boundary. We simulated datasets and measured accuracy over a wide range of parameters. Five clustering algorithms were evaluated (2 hard, 3 soft) using an adaptation of the extended B-cubed validation measure.
resultsWhen all genomes in a sample are below 95% sequence identity, all of the tested clustering algorithms performed well. When sequence data contains genomes above 95% identity (our operational definition of strain-level diversity), a naive soft-clustering extension of the Louvain method achieves the highest performance. DISCUSSION: Previously, only hard-clustering algorithms have been applied to metagenomic 3C and Hi-C data, yet none of these perform well when strain-level diversity exists in a metagenomic sample. Our simple extension of the Louvain method performed the best in these scenarios, however, accuracy remained well below the levels observed for samples without strain-level diversity. Strain resolution is also highly dependent on the amount of available 3C sequence data, suggesting that depth of sequencing must be carefully considered during experimental design. Finally, there appears to be great scope to improve the accuracy of strain resolution through further algorithm development.
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.