ArticleGigaScience2020
Sequencing smart: De novo sequencing and assembly approaches for a non-model mammal.
Article in GigaScience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characterization of a draft chromosome-scale genome assembly for the mutton snapper, Lutjanus analis.Genes & genomics · 2026Article
- Article
- Chromosome-level genome of the bank vole (Clethrionomys glareolus): a resource for eco-evo-disease research.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Characterisation of the Historic Demographic Decline of the British European Polecat Population.Molecular ecology · 2025Article
- De novo genome assembly and comparative genomics for the colonial ascidian Botrylloides violaceus.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2023Article
- Sequencing and de novo assembly of the Koshihikari genome and identification of the genomic region related to the eating quality of cooked rice.Molecular breeding : new strategies in plant improvement · 2022Article
- Genomic Tackling of Human Satellite DNA: Breaking Barriers through Time.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Article
- De novo whole-genome assembly and resequencing resources for the roan (Hippotragus equinus), an iconic African antelope.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2021Article
- ViR: a tool to solve intrasample variability in the prediction of viral integration sites using whole genome sequencing data.BMC bioinformatics · 2021Article
- Identifying the causes and consequences of assembly gaps using a multiplatform genome assembly of a bird-of-paradise.Molecular ecology resources · 2021Article
- Twelve quick steps for genome assembly and annotation in the classroom.PLoS computational biology · 2020Article
- A linked-read approach to museomics: Higher quality de novo genome assemblies from degraded tissues.Molecular ecology resources · 2020Article
- Sequencing smart: De novo sequencing and assembly approaches for a non-model mammal.GigaScience · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWhilst much sequencing effort has focused on key mammalian model organisms such as mouse and human, little is known about the relationship between genome sequencing techniques for non-model mammals and genome assembly quality. This is especially relevant to non-model mammals, where the samples to be sequenced are often degraded and of low quality. A key aspect when planning a genome project is the choice of sequencing data to generate. This decision is driven by several factors, including the biological questions being asked, the quality of DNA available, and the availability of funds. Cutting-edge sequencing technologies now make it possible to achieve highly contiguous, chromosome-level genome assemblies, but rely on high-quality high molecular weight DNA. However, funding is often insufficient for many independent research groups to use these techniques. Here we use a range of different genomic technologies generated from a roadkill European polecat (Mustela putorius) to assess various assembly techniques on this low-quality sample. We evaluated different approaches for de novo assemblies and discuss their value in relation to biological analyses.
resultsGenerally, assemblies containing more data types achieved better scores in our ranking system. However, when accounting for misassemblies, this was not always the case for Bionano and low-coverage 10x Genomics (for scaffolding only). We also find that the extra cost associated with combining multiple data types is not necessarily associated with better genome assemblies.
conclusionsThe high degree of variability between each de novo assembly method (assessed from the 7 key metrics) highlights the importance of carefully devising the sequencing strategy to be able to carry out the desired analysis. Adding more data to genome assemblies does not always result in better assemblies, so it is important to understand the nuances of genomic data integration explained here, in order to obtain cost-effective value for money when sequencing genomes.
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.