Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30597002›Full record

ArticleGigaScience2019

Libra: scalable k-mer-based tool for massive all-vs-all metagenome comparisons.

Illyoung Choi, Alise J Ponsero, Matthew Bomhoff, Ken Youens-Clark, John H Hartman, Bonnie L Hurwitz

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in GigaScience, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Elucidating Transitions ofJournal of computational biology : a journal of computational molecular cell biology · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Estimating similarity and distance using FracMinHash.Algorithms for molecular biology : AMB · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Comparison of k-mer-basedMicrobiome research reports · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Gut Microbiota in Dholes During Estrus.Frontiers in microbiology · 2020
    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.

Illyoung ChoiDepartment of Computer Science, University of Arizona, 1040 E. 4th Street, Tucson, Arizona, 85721, USA.
Alise J PonseroDepartment of Biosystems Engineering, University of Arizona, 1177 E. 4th Street, Tucson, Arizona, 85721, USA.
Matthew BomhoffDepartment of Biosystems Engineering, University of Arizona, 1177 E. 4th Street, Tucson, Arizona, 85721, USA.
Ken Youens-ClarkDepartment of Biosystems Engineering, University of Arizona, 1177 E. 4th Street, Tucson, Arizona, 85721, USA.
John H HartmanDepartment of Computer Science, University of Arizona, 1040 E. 4th Street, Tucson, Arizona, 85721, USA.
Bonnie L HurwitzDepartment of Biosystems Engineering, University of Arizona, 1177 E. 4th Street, Tucson, Arizona, 85721, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Shotgun metagenomics provides powerful insights into microbial community biodiversity and function. Yet, inferences from metagenomic studies are often limited by dataset size and complexity and are restricted by the availability and completeness of existing databases. De novo comparative metagenomics enables the comparison of metagenomes based on their total genetic content. Results: We developed a tool called Libra that performs an all-vs-all comparison of metagenomes for precise clustering based on their k-mer content. Libra uses a scalable Hadoop framework for massive metagenome comparisons, Cosine Similarity for calculating the distance using sequence composition and abundance while normalizing for sequencing depth, and a web-based implementation in iMicrobe (http://imicrobe.us) that uses the CyVerse advanced cyberinfrastructure to promote broad use of the tool by the scientific community. Conclusions: A comparison of Libra to equivalent tools using both simulated and real metagenomic datasets, ranging from 80 million to 4.2 billion reads, reveals that methods commonly implemented to reduce compute time for large datasets, such as data reduction, read count normalization, and presence/absence distance metrics, greatly diminish the resolution of large-scale comparative analyses. In contrast, Libra uses all of the reads to calculate k-mer abundance in a Hadoop architecture that can scale to any size dataset to enable global-scale analyses and link microbial signatures to biological processes.

Indexed as

SoftwareAlgorithmsCluster AnalysisHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingMetagenomicsMicrobiotaSequence Analysis, DNA

Identifiers

PMID30597002
PMCPMC6354030

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.