Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31577829›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

ProphET, prophage estimation tool: A stand-alone prophage sequence prediction tool with self-updating reference database.

João L Reis-Cunha, Daniella C Bartholomeu, Abigail L Manson, Ashlee M Earl, Gustavo C Cerqueira

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. V- and VNature communications · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Global diversity of enterococci and description of 18 previously unknown species.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  6. Tools and methodology toFrontiers in microbiology · 2024
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. The gut virome and the relevance of temperate phages in human health.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2023
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Computational Tools for the Analysis of Uncultivated Phage Genomes.Microbiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR · 2022
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

João L Reis-CunhaInfectious Disease and Microbiome Program, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-1034-0992
Daniella C BartholomeuDepartamento de Parasitologia, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Abigail L MansonInfectious Disease and Microbiome Program, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-3800-0714
Ashlee M EarlInfectious Disease and Microbiome Program, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Gustavo C CerqueiraInfectious Disease and Microbiome Program, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Broad Institute · USUniversidade Federal de Minas Gerais · BR

Funding

Viral Genomics: evolution, spread, and host interactionsU19AI110818 · NIAID · BROAD INSTITUTE, INC. · PI CUOMO, CHRISTINA A · 2014 to 2024
$66.5M
NIAID NIH HHS HHSN272200900018CNIAID NIH HHS U19 AI110818
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundProphages play a significant role in prokaryotic evolution, often altering the function of the cell that they infect via transfer of new genes e.g., virulence or antibiotic resistance factors, inactivation of existing genes or by modifying gene expression. Recently, phage therapy has gathered renewed interest as a promising alternative to control bacterial infections. Cataloging the repertoire of prophages in large collections of species' genomes is an important initial step in understanding their evolution and potential therapeutic utility. However, current widely-used tools for identifying prophages within bacterial genome sequences are mainly web-based, can have long response times, and do not scale to keep pace with the many thousands of genomes currently being sequenced routinely. METHODOLOGY: In this work, we present ProphET, an easy to install prophage predictor to be used in Linux operation system, without the constraints associated with a web-based tool. ProphET predictions rely on similarity searches against a database of prophage genes, taking as input a bacterial genome sequence in FASTA format and its corresponding gene annotation in GFF. ProphET identifies prophages in three steps: similarity search, calculation of the density of prophage genes, and edge refinement. ProphET performance was evaluated and compared with other phage predictors based on a set of 54 bacterial genomes containing 267 manually annotated prophages. FINDINGS AND

conclusionsProphET identifies prophages in bacterial genomes with high precision and offers a fast, highly scalable alternative to widely-used web-based applications for prophage detection.

Indexed as

SoftwareComputational BiologyDatabases, Nucleic AcidGenome, ViralGenomicsMolecular Sequence AnnotationProphagesSensitivity and SpecificityWeb Browser

Identifiers

PMID31577829
PMCPMC6774505
OpenAlexW2977560903

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.