Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29925315›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2018

ARKS: chromosome-scale scaffolding of human genome drafts with linked read kmers.

Lauren Coombe, Jessica Zhang, Benjamin P Vandervalk, Justin Chu, Shaun D Jackman, Inanc Birol, René L Warren

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing 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

49 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The Bioinformatic Applications of Hi-C and Linked Reads.Genomics, proteomics & bioinformatics · 2024
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Chromosome-level genome assembly of Lilford's wall lizard, Podarcis lilfordi (Günther, 1874) from the Balearic Islands (Spain).DNA research : an international journal for rapid publication of reports on genes and genomes · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. CNVs with adaptive potential inLife science alliance · 2022
    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

7 authors.

Lauren CoombeBC Cancer Genome Sciences Centre, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 4S6, Canada.
Jessica ZhangBC Cancer Genome Sciences Centre, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 4S6, Canada.
Benjamin P VandervalkBC Cancer Genome Sciences Centre, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 4S6, Canada.
Justin ChuBC Cancer Genome Sciences Centre, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 4S6, Canada.
Shaun D JackmanBC Cancer Genome Sciences Centre, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 4S6, Canada.
Inanc BirolBC Cancer Genome Sciences Centre, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 4S6, Canada.
René L WarrenBC Cancer Genome Sciences Centre, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 4S6, Canada. rwarren@bcgsc.ca.

Funding

De Novo Assembly Tools: Research with Unbiased Engines - Renewal (DNA-TRUER)R01HG007182 · NHGRI · PROVINCIAL HEALTH SERVICES AUTHORITY · PI BIROL, INANC · 2014 to 2022
$1.9M
NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG007182
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe long-range sequencing information captured by linked reads, such as those available from 10× Genomics (10xG), helps resolve genome sequence repeats, and yields accurate and contiguous draft genome assemblies. We introduce ARKS, an alignment-free linked read genome scaffolding methodology that uses linked reads to organize genome assemblies further into contiguous drafts. Our approach departs from other read alignment-dependent linked read scaffolders, including our own (ARCS), and uses a kmer-based mapping approach. The kmer mapping strategy has several advantages over read alignment methods, including better usability and faster processing, as it precludes the need for input sequence formatting and draft sequence assembly indexing. The reliance on kmers instead of read alignments for pairing sequences relaxes the workflow requirements, and drastically reduces the run time.

resultsHere, we show how linked reads, when used in conjunction with Hi-C data for scaffolding, improve a draft human genome assembly of PacBio long-read data five-fold (baseline vs. ARKS NG50 = 4.6 vs. 23.1 Mbp, respectively). We also demonstrate how the method provides further improvements of a megabase-scale Supernova human genome assembly (NG50 = 14.74 Mbp vs. 25.94 Mbp before and after ARKS), which itself exclusively uses linked read data for assembly, with an execution speed six to nine times faster than competitive linked read scaffolders (~ 10.5 h compared to 75.7 h, on average). Following ARKS scaffolding of a human genome 10xG Supernova assembly (of cell line NA12878), fewer than 9 scaffolds cover each chromosome, except the largest (chromosome 1, n = 13).

conclusionsARKS uses a kmer mapping strategy instead of linked read alignments to record and associate the barcode information needed to order and orient draft assembly sequences. The simplified workflow, when compared to that of our initial implementation, ARCS, markedly improves run time performances on experimental human genome datasets. Furthermore, the novel distance estimator in ARKS utilizes barcoding information from linked reads to estimate gap sizes. It accomplishes this by modeling the relationship between known distances of a region within contigs and calculating associated Jaccard indices. ARKS has the potential to provide correct, chromosome-scale genome assemblies, promptly. We expect ARKS to have broad utility in helping refine draft genomes.

Indexed as

Genome, HumanSoftwareChromosomes, HumanGenomicsHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansSequence Analysis, DNA10× Genomics ChromiumARCSARKSde novo assemblyGenome scaffoldingKmersLinked readsNext-generation sequencingRead mappingSupernova assembler

Identifiers

PMID29925315
PMCPMC6011487

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.