ArticleBMC bioinformatics2017
dBBQs: dataBase of Bacterial Quality scores.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Taxonomic Resolution of 16S rRNA, FastANI, Mash, and FastAAI across 30,495 Prokaryotic Type-Strain Genomes.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Article
- Genome sequences of antibiotic-resistant Streptococcus suis strains isolated from human patients and diseased and asymptomatic pigs in Thailand.Infection, genetics and evolution : journal of molecular epidemiology and evolutionary genetics in infectious diseases · 2021Article
- ProdMX: Rapid query and analysis of protein functional domain based on compressed sparse matrices.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2020Article
- Genome-Based Comparison of Clostridioides difficile: Average Amino Acid Identity Analysis of Core Genomes.Microbial ecology · 2018Article
- Pan4Draft: A Computational Tool to Improve the Accuracy of Pan-Genomic Analysis Using Draft Genomes.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Comparative Genomics ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2018Article
- Proceedings of the 2017 MidSouth Computational Biology and Bioinformatics Society (MCBIOS) Conference.BMC bioinformatics · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIt is well-known that genome sequencing technologies are becoming significantly cheaper and faster. As a result of this, the exponential growth in sequencing data in public databases allows us to explore ever growing large collections of genome sequences. However, it is less known that the majority of available sequenced genome sequences in public databases are not complete, drafts of varying qualities. We have calculated quality scores for around 100,000 bacterial genomes from all major genome repositories and put them in a fast and easy-to-use database.
resultsProkaryotic genomic data from all sources were collected and combined to make a non-redundant set of bacterial genomes. The genome quality score for each was calculated by four different measurements: assembly quality, number of rRNA and tRNA genes, and the occurrence of conserved functional domains. The dataBase of Bacterial Quality scores (dBBQs) was designed to store and retrieve quality scores. It offers fast searching and download features which the result can be used for further analysis. In addition, the search results are shown in interactive JavaScript chart framework using DC.js. The analysis of quality scores across major public genome databases find that around 68% of the genomes are of acceptable quality for many uses.
conclusionsdBBQs (available at http://arc-gem.uams.edu/dbbqs ) provides genome quality scores for all available prokaryotic genome sequences with a user-friendly Web-interface. These scores can be used as cut-offs to get a high-quality set of genomes for testing bioinformatics tools or improving the analysis. Moreover, all data of the four measurements that were combined to make the quality score for each genome, which can potentially be used for further analysis. dBBQs will be updated regularly and is freely use for non-commercial purpose.
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.