ArticleEcology and evolution2019
Ultraconserved element (UCE) probe set design: Base genome and initial design parameters critical for optimization.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Covering All Bases: A Universal Metazoan UCE Probe Set to Democratize Phylogenomics.Genome biology and evolution · 2025Article
- Aridification and major geotectonic landscape change shaped an extraordinary species radiation across a world's extreme elevational gradient.Communications biology · 2024Article
- Phylogenomics of Tetraopes longhorn beetles unravels their evolutionary history and biogeographic origins.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Low hybridization temperatures improve target capture success of invertebrate loci: a case study of leaf-footed bugs (Hemiptera: Coreoidea).Royal Society open science · 2023Article
- Shards, sequences, and shorelines: two new species ofZooKeys · 2020Article
- Ultraconserved element (UCE) probe set design: Base genome and initial design parameters critical for optimization.Ecology and evolution · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Targeted capture and enrichment approaches have proven effective for phylogenetic study. Ultraconserved elements (UCEs) in particular have exhibited great utility for phylogenomic analyses, with the software package phyluce being among the most utilized pipelines for UCE phylogenomics, including probe design. Despite the success of UCEs, it is becoming increasing apparent that diverse lineages require probe sets tailored to focal taxa in order to improve locus recovery. However, factors affecting probe design and methods for optimizing probe sets to focal taxa remain underexplored. Here, we use newly available beetle (Coleoptera) genomic resources to investigate factors affecting UCE probe set design using phyluce. In particular, we explore the effects of stringency during initial design steps, as well as base genome choice on resulting probe sets and locus recovery. We found that both base genome choice and initial bait design stringency parameters greatly alter the number of resultant probes included in final probe sets and strongly affect the number of loci detected and recovered during in silico testing of these probe sets. In addition, we identify attributes of base genomes that correlated with high performance in probe design. Ultimately, we provide a recommended workflow for using phyluce to design an optimized UCE probe set that will work across a targeted lineage, and use our findings to develop a new, open-source UCE probe set for beetles of the suborder Adephaga.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.