Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29263086›Full record

ReviewThe Plant cell2018

Is It Ordered Correctly? Validating Genome Assemblies by Optical Mapping.

Joshua A Udall, R Kelly Dawe

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Plant cell, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Chromosome-Level Genome Assembly of a FragrantInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. The Genome Sequence ofFrontiers in plant science · 2019
    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

2 authors.

Joshua A UdallPlant and Wildlife Science Department, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah 84602 jaudall@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-0978-4764
R Kelly DaweDepartment of Genetics, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Long-read single-molecule sequencing, Hi-C sequencing, and improved bioinformatic tools are ushering in an era where complete genome assembly will become common for species with few or no classical genetic resources. There are no guidelines for how to proceed in such cases. Ideally, such genomes would be sequenced by two different methods so that one assembly serves as confirmation of the other; however, cost constraints make this approach unlikely. Overreliance on synteny as a means of confirming and ordering contigs will lead to compounded errors. Optical mapping is an accessible and relatively mature technology that can be used for genome assembly validation. We discuss how optical mapping can be used as a validation tool for genome assemblies and how to interpret the results. In addition, we discuss methods for using optical map data to enhance genome assemblies derived from both traditional sequence contigs and Hi-C pseudomolecules.

Indexed as

Genome, PlantChromosome MappingOptogeneticsReproducibility of ResultsSequence Analysis, DNA

Identifiers

PMID29263086
PMCPMC5810561

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.