Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32601059›Full record

ArticleG3 (Bethesda, Md.)2020

Measuring Genome Sizes Using Read-Depth, k-mers, and Flow Cytometry: Methodological Comparisons in Beetles (Coleoptera).

James M Pflug, Valerie Renee Holmes, Crystal Burrus, J Spencer Johnston, David R Maddison

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in G3 (Bethesda, Md.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 99 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
99citing papers in PubMed
19.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

99 citing papers in PubMed, 155 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. A highly contiguous genome assembly of Cyclamen persicum to accelerate functional genomics and breeding.DNA research : an international journal for rapid publication of reports on genes and genomes · 2026
    Article
  5. Chromosome-scale genome assembly and genomic prediction of essential oil compounds in Atractylodes lancea for genomics-assisted breeding.DNA research : an international journal for rapid publication of reports on genes and genomes · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Nuclear genome profiling of two species ofNAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

39 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 1 country.

James M PflugDepartment of Integrative Biology, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331 pflugja@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-4890-0270
Valerie Renee HolmesDepartment of Entomology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843.
Crystal BurrusDepartment of Entomology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843.
J Spencer JohnstonDepartment of Entomology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843.
David R MaddisonDepartment of Integrative Biology, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331.
Texas A&M University · USOregon State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Measuring genome size across different species can yield important insights into evolution of the genome and allow for more informed decisions when designing next-generation genomic sequencing projects. New techniques for estimating genome size using shallow genomic sequence data have emerged which have the potential to augment our knowledge of genome sizes, yet these methods have only been used in a limited number of empirical studies. In this project, we compare estimation methods using next-generation sequencing (k-mer methods and average read depth of single-copy genes) to measurements from flow cytometry, a standard method for genome size measures, using ground beetles (Carabidae) and other members of the beetle suborder Adephaga as our test system. We also present a new protocol for using read-depth of single-copy genes to estimate genome size. Additionally, we report flow cytometry measurements for five previously unmeasured carabid species, as well as 21 new draft genomes and six new draft transcriptomes across eight species of adephagan beetles. No single sequence-based method performed well on all species, and all tended to underestimate the genome sizes, although only slightly in most samples. For one species,

Indexed as

ColeopteraAnimalsFlow CytometryGenome SizeHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingCarabidaeFlow CytometryGenome SizeInsect GenomesK-mer

Identifiers

PMID32601059
PMCPMC7466995
OpenAlexW3040417581

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.