Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31895413›Full record

ArticleGigaScience2020

The draft nuclear genome assembly of Eucalyptus pauciflora: a pipeline for comparing de novo assemblies.

Weiwen Wang, Ashutosh Das, David Kainer, Miriam Schalamun, Alejandro Morales-Suarez, Benjamin Schwessinger, Robert Lanfear

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in GigaScience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 60 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Complete Genome of Rose Myrtle,Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Green plant genomes: What we know in an era of rapidly expanding opportunities.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  15. Review
  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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Weiwen WangResearch School of Biology, the Australian National University. 134 Linnaeus Way, Acton, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia.
Ashutosh DasResearch School of Biology, the Australian National University. 134 Linnaeus Way, Acton, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia.
David KainerResearch School of Biology, the Australian National University. 134 Linnaeus Way, Acton, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia.
Miriam SchalamunResearch School of Biology, the Australian National University. 134 Linnaeus Way, Acton, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia.
Alejandro Morales-SuarezDepartment of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University.Building 6SR (E8B), 6 Science Rd, Sydney, NSW, 2109, Australia.
Benjamin SchwessingerResearch School of Biology, the Australian National University. 134 Linnaeus Way, Acton, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia.
Robert LanfearResearch School of Biology, the Australian National University. 134 Linnaeus Way, Acton, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia.
Australian National University · AUMacquarie University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEucalyptus pauciflora (the snow gum) is a long-lived tree with high economic and ecological importance. Currently, little genomic information for E. pauciflora is available. Here, we sequentially assemble the genome of Eucalyptus pauciflora with different methods, and combine multiple existing and novel approaches to help to select the best genome assembly.

findingsWe generated high coverage of long- (Nanopore, 174×) and short- (Illumina, 228×) read data from a single E. pauciflora individual and compared assemblies from 5 assemblers (Canu, SMARTdenovo, Flye, Marvel, and MaSuRCA) with different read lengths (1 and 35 kb minimum read length). A key component of our approach is to keep a randomly selected collection of ∼10% of both long and short reads separated from the assemblies to use as a validation set for assessing assemblies. Using this validation set along with a range of existing tools, we compared the assemblies in 8 ways: contig N50, BUSCO scores, LAI (long terminal repeat assembly index) scores, assembly ploidy, base-level error rate, CGAL (computing genome assembly likelihoods) scores, structural variation, and genome sequence similarity. Our result showed that MaSuRCA generated the best assembly, which is 594.87 Mb in size, with a contig N50 of 3.23 Mb, and an estimated error rate of ∼0.006 errors per base.

conclusionsWe report a draft genome of E. pauciflora, which will be a valuable resource for further genomic studies of eucalypts. The approaches for assessing and comparing genomes should help in assessing and choosing among many potential genome assemblies from a single dataset.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyGenome, PlantGenomicsDNA ContaminationEucalyptusGenome Sizeassembly comparisonEucalyptus paucifloragenome assessmentgenome polishinghaplotig separationhybrid assemblylong-read assemblynanopore sequencing

Identifiers

PMID31895413
PMCPMC6939829
OpenAlexW2997449975

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.