Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33653268›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2021

Low impact of different SNP panels from two building-loci pipelines on RAD-Seq population genomic metrics: case study on five diverse aquatic species.

Adrián Casanova, Francesco Maroso, Andrés Blanco, Miguel Hermida, Néstor Ríos, Graciela García, Alice Manuzzi, Lorenzo Zane, Ana Verissimo, José-Luís García-Marín and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

13 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.

Adrián CasanovaDepartment of Zoology, Genetics and Physical Anthropology, ACUIGEN group, Faculty of Veterinary, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Campus of Lugo, 27002, Lugo, Spain.
Francesco MarosoDepartment of Zoology, Genetics and Physical Anthropology, ACUIGEN group, Faculty of Veterinary, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Campus of Lugo, 27002, Lugo, Spain.
Andrés BlancoDepartment of Zoology, Genetics and Physical Anthropology, ACUIGEN group, Faculty of Veterinary, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Campus of Lugo, 27002, Lugo, Spain.
Miguel HermidaDepartment of Zoology, Genetics and Physical Anthropology, ACUIGEN group, Faculty of Veterinary, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Campus of Lugo, 27002, Lugo, Spain.
Néstor RíosSección Genética Evolutiva. Facultad de Ciencias, UdelaR, Iguá 4225, 11400, Montevideo, Uruguay.
Graciela GarcíaSección Genética Evolutiva. Facultad de Ciencias, UdelaR, Iguá 4225, 11400, Montevideo, Uruguay.
Alice ManuzziNational Institute of Aquatic Resources, Technical University of Denmark, Vejlsøvej 39, 8600, Silkeborg, Denmark.
Lorenzo ZaneDepartment of Biology, University of Padova, via U. Bassi 58/B, 35131, Padova, Italy.
Ana VerissimoCIBIO - U.P. - Research Center for Biodiversity and Genetic Resources, Campus Agrário de Vairão, 4485-661, Vairão, Portugal.
José-Luís García-MarínLaboratori d'Ictiologia Genètica, Departamento de Biología, Faculty of Sciences, University of Girona, Campus of Montilivi, ES-17071, Girona, Spain.
Carmen BouzaDepartment of Zoology, Genetics and Physical Anthropology, ACUIGEN group, Faculty of Veterinary, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Campus of Lugo, 27002, Lugo, Spain.
Manuel VeraDepartment of Zoology, Genetics and Physical Anthropology, ACUIGEN group, Faculty of Veterinary, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Campus of Lugo, 27002, Lugo, Spain. manuel.vera@usc.es.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1584-6140
Paulino MartínezDepartment of Zoology, Genetics and Physical Anthropology, ACUIGEN group, Faculty of Veterinary, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Campus of Lugo, 27002, Lugo, Spain.
Universidade de Santiago de Compostela · ESCentro Uruguayo de Imagenología Molecular · UYTechnical University of Denmark · DKUniversitat de Girona · ESUniversity of Padua · ITWilliam & Mary · US

Funding

Interreg EAPA_458/2016Universitat de Girona MPCUdG2016/060Xunta de Galicia GRC2014/010
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe irruption of Next-generation sequencing (NGS) and restriction site-associated DNA sequencing (RAD-seq) in the last decade has led to the identification of thousands of molecular markers and their genotyping for refined genomic screening. This approach has been especially useful for non-model organisms with limited genomic resources. Many building-loci pipelines have been developed to obtain robust single nucleotide polymorphism (SNPs) genotyping datasets using a de novo RAD-seq approach, i.e. without reference genomes. Here, the performances of two building-loci pipelines, STACKS 2 and Meyer's 2b-RAD v2.1 pipeline, were compared using a diverse set of aquatic species representing different genomic and/or population structure scenarios. Two bivalve species (Manila clam and common edible cockle) and three fish species (brown trout, silver catfish and small-spotted catshark) were studied. Four SNP panels were evaluated in each species to test both different building-loci pipelines and criteria for SNP selection. Furthermore, for Manila clam and brown trout, a reference genome approach was used as control.

resultsDespite different outcomes were observed between pipelines and species with the diverse SNP calling and filtering steps tested, no remarkable differences were found on genetic diversity and differentiation within species with the SNP panels obtained with a de novo approach. The main differences were found in brown trout between the de novo and reference genome approaches. Genotyped vs missing data mismatches were the main genotyping difference detected between the two building-loci pipelines or between the de novo and reference genome comparisons.

conclusionsTested building-loci pipelines for selection of SNP panels seem to have low influence on population genetics inference across the diverse case-study scenarios here studied. However, preliminary trials with different bioinformatic pipelines are suggested to evaluate their influence on population parameters according with the specific goals of each study.

Indexed as

MetagenomicsPolymorphism, Single NucleotideAnimalsGenomeSequence Analysis, DNA2b-RAD v2.1 pipelineBivalvesBowtie 1de novo approachFishPopulation genomicsReference genome approachSTACKS 2

Identifiers

PMID33653268
PMCPMC7927381
OpenAlexW3135155162

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.