Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30423092›Full record

ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2018

Fast characterization of segmental duplications in genome assemblies.

Ibrahim Numanagic, Alim S Gökkaya, Lillian Zhang, Bonnie Berger, Can Alkan, Faraz Hach

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 64 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
64citing papers in PubMed
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

64 citing papers in PubMed, 103 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. The diploid reference genome of a human embryonic stem cell line.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Human acrocentric chromosome short armbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

4 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Ibrahim NumanagicComputer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Alim S GökkayaDepartment of Computer Engineering, Bilkent University, Ankara, Turkey.
Lillian ZhangComputer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Bonnie BergerComputer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Can AlkanDepartment of Computer Engineering, Bilkent University, Ankara, Turkey.
Faraz HachVancouver Prostate Centre, Vancouver, Canada.
Bilkent University · TRMassachusetts Institute of Technology · USUniversity of British Columbia · CA

Funding

Compressive genomics for large omics data sets: Algorithms applications & toolsR01GM108348 · NIGMS · MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI BERGER, BONNIE · 2013 to 2019
$2.1M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM108348
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Motivation: Segmental duplications (SDs) or low-copy repeats, are segments of DNA > 1 Kbp with high sequence identity that are copied to other regions of the genome. SDs are among the most important sources of evolution, a common cause of genomic structural variation and several are associated with diseases of genomic origin including schizophrenia and autism. Despite their functional importance, SDs present one of the major hurdles for de novo genome assembly due to the ambiguity they cause in building and traversing both state-of-the-art overlap-layout-consensus and de Bruijn graphs. This causes SD regions to be misassembled, collapsed into a unique representation, or completely missing from assembled reference genomes for various organisms. In turn, this missing or incorrect information limits our ability to fully understand the evolution and the architecture of the genomes. Despite the essential need to accurately characterize SDs in assemblies, there has been only one tool that was developed for this purpose, called Whole-Genome Assembly Comparison (WGAC); its primary goal is SD detection. WGAC is comprised of several steps that employ different tools and custom scripts, which makes this strategy difficult and time consuming to use. Thus there is still a need for algorithms to characterize within-assembly SDs quickly, accurately, and in a user friendly manner. Results: Here we introduce SEgmental Duplication Evaluation Framework (SEDEF) to rapidly detect SDs through sophisticated filtering strategies based on Jaccard similarity and local chaining. We show that SEDEF accurately detects SDs while maintaining substantial speed up over WGAC that translates into practical run times of minutes instead of weeks. Notably, our algorithm captures up to 25% 'pairwise error' between segments, whereas previous studies focused on only 10%, allowing us to more deeply track the evolutionary history of the genome. Availability and implementation: SEDEF is available at https://github.com/vpc-ccg/sedef.

Indexed as

GenomeSegmental Duplications, GenomicAlgorithmsGenomicsHumans

Identifiers

PMID30423092
PMCPMC6129265
OpenAlexW2810570362

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.