ArticleBioinformation2016
Optimizing k-mer size using a variant grid search to enhance
Article in Bioinformation, 2016. 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.
- Elucidating Transitions ofJournal of computational biology : a journal of computational molecular cell biology · 2026Article
- Genome sequence of the halotolerant yeastMicrobiology resource announcements · 2025Article
- A survey of k-mer methods and applications in bioinformatics.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024Review
- Ability of Two Strains of Lactic Acid Bacteria To Inhibit Listeria monocytogenes by Spot Inoculation and in an Environmental Microbiome Context.Microbiology spectrum · 2022Article
- An Alignment-Independent Approach for the Study of Viral Sequence Diversity at Any Given Rank of Taxonomy Lineage.Biology · 2021Article
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
Largely driven by huge reductions in per-base costs, sequencing nucleic acids has become a near-ubiquitous technique in laboratories performing biological and biomedical research. Most of the effort goes to re-sequencing, but assembly of de novogenerated, raw sequence reads into contigs that span as much of the genome as possible is central to many projects. Although truly complete coverage is not realistically attainable, maximizing the amount of sequence that can be correctly assembled into contigs contributes to coverage. Here we compare three commonly used assembly algorithms (ABySS, Velvet and SOAPdenovo2), and show that empirical optimization of k-mer values has a disproportionate influence on de novo assembly of a eukaryotic genome, the nematode parasite Meloidogynechitwoodi. Each assembler was challenged with about 40 million Iluumina II paired-end reads, and assemblies performed under a range of k-mer sizes. In each instance, the optimal k-mer was 127, although based on N50 values,ABySS was more efficient than the others. That the assembly was not spurious was established using the "Core Eukaryotic Gene Mapping Approach", which indicated that 98.79% of the M. chitwoodi genome was accounted for by the assembly. Subsequent gene finding and annotation are consistent with this and suggest that k-mer optimization contributes to the robustness of assembly.
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.