Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33677552›Full record

ArticleG3 (Bethesda, Md.)2021

Chromosome-level genome assembly and structural variant analysis of two laboratory yeast strains from the Peterhof Genetic Collection lineage.

Yury A Barbitoff, Andrew G Matveenko, Anton B Matiiv, Evgeniia M Maksiutenko, Svetlana E Moskalenko, Polina B Drozdova, Dmitrii E Polev, Alexandra Y Beliavskaia, Lavrentii G Danilov, Alexander V Predeus and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in G3 (Bethesda, Md.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Yury A BarbitoffDepartment of Genetics and Biotechnology, St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg 199034, Russia.
Andrew G MatveenkoDepartment of Genetics and Biotechnology, St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg 199034, Russia.
Anton B MatiivDepartment of Genetics and Biotechnology, St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg 199034, Russia.
Evgeniia M MaksiutenkoDepartment of Genetics and Biotechnology, St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg 199034, Russia.
Svetlana E MoskalenkoDepartment of Genetics and Biotechnology, St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg 199034, Russia.
Polina B DrozdovaIrkutsk State University, Irkutsk 630003, Russia.
Dmitrii E PolevCerbaLab Ltd., St. Petersburg 199106, Russia.
Alexandra Y BeliavskaiaDepartment of Invertebrate Zoology, St. Petersburg State University, 199034 St. Petersburg, Russia.
Lavrentii G DanilovDepartment of Genetics and Biotechnology, St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg 199034, Russia.
Alexander V PredeusBioinformatics Institute, St. Petersburg 197342, Russia.
Galina A ZhouravlevaDepartment of Genetics and Biotechnology, St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg 199034, Russia.
St Petersburg University · RUIrkutsk State University · RUUniversity of Liverpool · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Thousands of yeast genomes have been sequenced with both traditional and long-read technologies, and multiple observations about modes of genome evolution for both wild and laboratory strains have been drawn from these sequences. In our study, we applied Oxford Nanopore and Illumina technologies to assemble complete genomes of two widely used members of a distinct laboratory yeast lineage, the Peterhof Genetic Collection (PGC), and investigate the structural features of these genomes including transposable element content, copy number alterations, and structural rearrangements. We identified numerous notable structural differences between genomes of PGC strains and the reference S288C strain. We discovered a substantial enrichment of mid-length insertions and deletions within repetitive coding sequences, such as in the SCH9 gene or the NUP100 gene, with possible impact of these variants on protein amyloidogenicity. High contiguity of the final assemblies allowed us to trace back the history of reciprocal unbalanced translocations between chromosomes I, VIII, IX, XI, and XVI of the PGC strains. We show that formation of hybrid alleles of the FLO genes during such chromosomal rearrangements is likely responsible for the lack of invasive growth of yeast strains. Taken together, our results highlight important features of laboratory yeast strain evolution using the power of long-read sequencing.

Indexed as

Saccharomyces cerevisiaeSaccharomyces cerevisiae ProteinsChromosomesDNA Transposable ElementsHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingLaboratoriesProtein Serine-Threonine KinasesSequence Analysis, DNADNA Transposable ElementsProtein Serine-Threonine KinasesSaccharomyces cerevisiae ProteinsSCH9 protein, S cerevisiae74-D694FLO geneslong readsstructural variantYeast genome

Identifiers

PMID33677552
PMCPMC8759820
OpenAlexW3128109191

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.