ArticleGigaScience2019
To assemble or not to resemble-A validated Comparative Metatranscriptomics Workflow (CoMW).
Article in GigaScience, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 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
26 citing papers in PubMed.
- nf-core/magmap: Map metatranscriptomes to large collections of genomes.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Metagenomic insights into viral and microbial genes of Russian High-Arctic soil microbiomes.Communications biology · 2026Article
- Interpreting fungal ecological contributions through taxonomic and functional profiling of metatranscriptomics.IMA fungus · 2026Review
- Concurrent stimulation of diflufenican biodegradation and changes in the active microbiome in gravel revealed by Total RNA.Microbiology spectrum · 2025Article
- Arctic Soil C and N Cycling Are Linked With Microbial Adaptations During Drought.Global change biology · 2025Article
- Environmental community transcriptomics: strategies and struggles.Briefings in functional genomics · 2025Review
- The Nextflow nf-core/metatdenovo pipeline for reproducible annotation of metatranscriptomes, and more.PeerJ · 2025Article
- Microbial genetic potential differs among cryospheric habitats of the Damma glacier.Microbial genomics · 2024Article
- Total RNA analysis of the active microbiome on moving bed biofilm reactor carriers under incrementally increasing micropollutant concentrations.FEMS microbiology ecology · 2024Article
- The Feather Moss Hylocomium splendens Affects the Transcriptional Profile of a Symbiotic Cyanobacterium in Relation to Acquisition and Turnover of Key Nutrients.Microbial ecology · 2024Article
- Investigating eukaryotic and prokaryotic diversity and functional potential in the cold and alkaline ikaite columns in Greenland.Frontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
- Searching for new plastic-degrading enzymes from the plastisphere of alpine soils using a metagenomic mining approach.PloS one · 2024Article
- Abrupt permafrost thaw triggers activity of copiotrophs and microbiome predators.FEMS microbiology ecology · 2023Article
- Distinct taxonomic and functional profiles of high Arctic and alpine permafrost-affected soil microbiomes.Environmental microbiome · 2023Article
- Reverse engineering environmental metatranscriptomes clarifies best practices for eukaryotic assembly.BMC bioinformatics · 2023Article
- The hitchhikers' guide to RNA sequencing and functional analysis.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2023Article
- A Decade of GigaScience: GigaDB and the Open Data Movement.GigaScience · 2022Article
- Long-term mercury contamination does not affect the microbial gene potential for C and N cycling in soils but enhances detoxification gene abundance.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
- Shotgun Metagenomics of Deep Forest Soil Layers Show Evidence of Altered Microbial Genetic Potential for Biogeochemical Cycling.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
- An Introduction to Next Generation Sequencing Bioinformatic Analysis in Gut Microbiome Studies.Biomolecules · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMetatranscriptomics has been used widely for investigation and quantification of microbial communities' activity in response to external stimuli. By assessing the genes expressed, metatranscriptomics provides an understanding of the interactions between different major functional guilds and the environment. Here, we present a de novo assembly-based Comparative Metatranscriptomics Workflow (CoMW) implemented in a modular, reproducible structure. Metatranscriptomics typically uses short sequence reads, which can either be directly aligned to external reference databases ("assembly-free approach") or first assembled into contigs before alignment ("assembly-based approach"). We also compare CoMW (assembly-based implementation) with an assembly-free alternative workflow, using simulated and real-world metatranscriptomes from Arctic and temperate terrestrial environments. We evaluate their accuracy in precision and recall using generic and specialized hierarchical protein databases.
resultsCoMW provided significantly fewer false-positive results, resulting in more precise identification and quantification of functional genes in metatranscriptomes. Using the comprehensive database M5nr, the assembly-based approach identified genes with only 0.6% false-positive results at thresholds ranging from inclusive to stringent compared with the assembly-free approach, which yielded up to 15% false-positive results. Using specialized databases (carbohydrate-active enzyme and nitrogen cycle), the assembly-based approach identified and quantified genes with 3-5 times fewer false-positive results. We also evaluated the impact of both approaches on real-world datasets.
conclusionsWe present an open source de novo assembly-based CoMW. Our benchmarking findings support assembling short reads into contigs before alignment to a reference database because this provides higher precision and minimizes false-positive results.
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.