ArticleNAR genomics and bioinformatics2020
Benchmarking of long-read correction methods.
Article in NAR genomics and bioinformatics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 89 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
89 citing papers in PubMed, 156 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hybrid untargeted short-read and targeted long-read RNA sequencing facilitates genotype-phenotype associations at single-cell resolution.Genome biology · 2026Article
- LVV SMRTcap reveals extensive proviral variation in lentiviral vector-transduced CAR T cells.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- LOCALE: Local-Alignment Embeddings for Noise-Robust DNA Search at SRA Scale.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Quantification of disease-associated RNA tandem repeats by nanopore sensing.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Article
- RAAVioli: A comprehensive approach to characterizing AAV vector integrations and rearrangements.Molecular therapy. Advances · 2026Article
- Review
- Development and validation of HIV SMRTcap for the characterization of HIV-1 reservoirs across tissues and subtypes.PLoS pathogens · 2026Article
- Article
- Shaping Precision Medicine: The Journey of Sequencing Technologies Across Human Solid Tumors.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Why Are Long-Read Sequencing Methods Revolutionizing Microbiome Analysis?Microorganisms · 2025Review
- Accurate genotyping of three major respiratory bacterial pathogens with ONT R10.4.1 long-read sequencing.Genome research · 2025Article
- Pooled, Long-read Sequencing for Structural Variant Characterization in Schistosome Populations.Genome biology and evolution · 2025Article
- De novo transcriptome assembly of Acartia tonsa adults using Nanopore long-read sequencing.Scientific data · 2025Article
- Do we need a standardized 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing analysis protocol for poultry microbiota research?Poultry science · 2025Review
- Development of a Clinically Applicable High-Resolution Assay for Sperm Mosaicism.The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD · 2025Article
- Influence of Sequencing Technology on Pangenome-Level Analysis and Detection of Antimicrobial Resistance Genes in ESKAPE Pathogens.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- GoldPolish-target: targeted long-read genome assembly polishing.BMC bioinformatics · 2025Article
- Skeletal Muscle mRNA Splicing Variants Association With Four Different Fitness and Energetic Measures in the GESTALT Study.Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle · 2025Article
- Unsupervised detection of novel SARS-CoV-2 mutations and lineages in wastewater samples using long-read sequencing.BMC genomics · 2025Article
29 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Third-generation sequencing technologies provided by Pacific Biosciences and Oxford Nanopore Technologies generate read lengths in the scale of kilobasepairs. However, these reads display high error rates, and correction steps are necessary to realize their great potential in genomics and transcriptomics. Here, we compare properties of PacBio and Nanopore data and assess correction methods by Canu, MARVEL and proovread in various combinations. We found total error rates of around 13% in the raw datasets. PacBio reads showed a high rate of insertions (around 8%) whereas Nanopore reads showed similar rates for substitutions, insertions and deletions of around 4% each. In data from both technologies the errors were uniformly distributed along reads apart from noisy 5' ends, and homopolymers appeared among the most over-represented kmers relative to a reference. Consensus correction using read overlaps reduced error rates to about 1% when using Canu or MARVEL after patching. The lowest error rate in Nanopore data (0.45%) was achieved by applying proovread on MARVEL-patched data including Illumina short-reads, and the lowest error rate in PacBio data (0.42%) was the result of Canu correction with minimap2 alignment after patching. Our study provides valuable insights and benchmarks regarding long-read data and correction methods.
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.