ArticleYeast (Chichester, England)2018
Misidentification of genome assemblies in public databases: The case of Naumovozyma dairenensis and proposal of a protocol to correct misidentifications.
Article in Yeast (Chichester, England), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Negligible influence of limescale deposits on faucet aerators on measured microorganism loads.European journal of microbiology & immunology · 2025Article
- Seven quick tips for gene-focused computational pangenomic analysis.BioData mining · 2024Article
- Molecular Diagnostics for Invasive Fungal Diseases: Current and Future Approaches.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Phylogenomics reveals extensive misidentification of fungal strains from the genusMicrobiology spectrum · 2024Article
- A taxonomic revision of the genus Angelica (Apiaceae) in Taiwan with a new species A. aliensis.Botanical studies · 2024Article
- Inference of phylogenetic trees directly from raw sequencing reads using Read2Tree.Nature biotechnology · 2024Article
- Read2Tree: scalable and accurate phylogenetic trees from raw reads.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2022Article
- Review
- Getting science priorities straight: how to increase the reliability of specimen identification?Biology letters · 2021Article
- Taxonomic evaluation ofPeerJ · 2021Article
- The evolving species concepts used for yeasts: from phenotypes and genomes to speciation networks.Fungal diversity · 2021Review
- Genome Assemblies of Two Rare Opportunistic Yeast Pathogens:G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2019Article
- Recent trends in molecular diagnostics of yeast infections: from PCR to NGS.FEMS microbiology reviews · 2019Review
- Coverage-Versus-Length Plots, a Simple Quality Control Step forG3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2019Article
- Genomic, Phenotypic, and Virulence Analysis ofInfection and immunity · 2019Article
- Misidentification of genome assemblies in public databases: The case of Naumovozyma dairenensis and proposal of a protocol to correct misidentifications.Yeast (Chichester, England) · 2018Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Online sequence databases such as NCBI GenBank serve as a tremendously useful platform for researchers to share and reuse published data. However, submission systems lack control for errors such as organism misidentification, which once entered in the database can be propagated and mislead downstream analyses. Here we present an illustrating case of misidentification of Candida albicans from a clinical sample as Naumovozyma dairenensis based on whole-genome shotgun data. Analyses of phylogenetic markers, read mapping and single nucleotide polymorphisms served to correct the identification. We propose that the routine use of such analyses could help to detect misidentifications arising from unsupervised analyses and correct them before they enter the databases. Finally, we discuss broader implications of such misidentifications and the difficulty of correcting them once they are in the records.
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.