Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29725120›Full record

ArticleNature protocols2018

Long-read sequencing data analysis for yeasts.

Jia-Xing Yue, Gianni Liti

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Nature protocols, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing 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

35 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Heme Oxygenase-1 (Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    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.

Jia-Xing YueUniversité Côte d'Azur, CNRS, INSERM, IRCAN, Nice, France.ORCID 0000-0002-2122-9221
Gianni LitiUniversité Côte d'Azur, CNRS, INSERM, IRCAN, Nice, France.ORCID 0000-0002-2318-0775

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Long-read sequencing technologies have become increasingly popular due to their strengths in resolving complex genomic regions. As a leading model organism with small genome size and great biotechnological importance, the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae has many isolates currently being sequenced with long reads. However, analyzing long-read sequencing data to produce high-quality genome assembly and annotation remains challenging. Here, we present a modular computational framework named long-read sequencing data analysis for yeasts (LRSDAY), the first one-stop solution that streamlines this process. Starting from the raw sequencing reads, LRSDAY can produce chromosome-level genome assembly and comprehensive genome annotation in a highly automated manner with minimal manual intervention, which is not possible using any alternative tool available to date. The annotated genomic features include centromeres, protein-coding genes, tRNAs, transposable elements (TEs), and telomere-associated elements. Although tailored for S. cerevisiae, we designed LRSDAY to be highly modular and customizable, making it adaptable to virtually any eukaryotic organism. When applying LRSDAY to an S. cerevisiae strain, it takes ∼41 h to generate a complete and well-annotated genome from ∼100× Pacific Biosciences (PacBio) running the basic workflow with four threads. Basic experience working within the Linux command-line environment is recommended for carrying out the analysis using LRSDAY.

Indexed as

Molecular Sequence AnnotationComputational BiologyDNA, FungalSaccharomyces cerevisiaeSequence Analysis, DNADNA, Fungal

Identifiers

PMID29725120

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.