Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30401722›Full record

ArticlePlant physiology2019

Long-Read Annotation: Automated Eukaryotic Genome Annotation Based on Long-Read cDNA Sequencing.

David E Cook, Jose Espejo Valle-Inclan, Alice Pajoro, Hanna Rovenich, Bart P H J Thomma, Luigi Faino

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plant physiology, 2019. 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. High-quality genome ofPlant diversity · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Dynamic DNAGenome research · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. De Novo Assembly and Annotation of 11 Diverse Shrub Willow (International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  19. 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

6 authors.

David E CookLaboratory of Phytopathology, Wageningen University and Research, Droevendaalsesteeg 1, 6708 PB Wageningen, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2719-4701
Jose Espejo Valle-InclanLaboratory of Phytopathology, Wageningen University and Research, Droevendaalsesteeg 1, 6708 PB Wageningen, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4857-5984
Alice PajoroLaboratory of Molecular Biology, Wageningen University and Research, Droevendaalsesteeg 1, 6708 PB Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Hanna RovenichLaboratory of Phytopathology, Wageningen University and Research, Droevendaalsesteeg 1, 6708 PB Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Bart P H J ThommaLaboratory of Phytopathology, Wageningen University and Research, Droevendaalsesteeg 1, 6708 PB Wageningen, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4125-4181
Luigi FainoLaboratory of Phytopathology, Wageningen University and Research, Droevendaalsesteeg 1, 6708 PB Wageningen, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6807-4191

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Single-molecule full-length complementary DNA (cDNA) sequencing can aid genome annotation by revealing transcript structure and alternative splice forms, yet current annotation pipelines do not incorporate such information. Here we present long-read annotation (LoReAn) software, an automated annotation pipeline utilizing short- and long-read cDNA sequencing, protein evidence, and ab initio prediction to generate accurate genome annotations. Based on annotations of two fungal genomes (

Indexed as

Genome, PlantSoftwareGenome, FungalMolecular Sequence AnnotationSequence Analysis, DNA

Identifiers

PMID30401722
PMCPMC6324239

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.