Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33752598›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2021

Comparing de novo transcriptome assembly tools in di- and autotetraploid non-model plant species.

Silvia Madritsch, Agnes Burg, Eva M Sehr

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Frontiers in plant science · 2022
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Silvia MadritschAIT Austrian Institute of Technology, Center for Health and Bioresources, Tulln, Austria.
Agnes BurgAIT Austrian Institute of Technology, Center for Health and Bioresources, Tulln, Austria.
Eva M SehrAIT Austrian Institute of Technology, Center for Health and Bioresources, Tulln, Austria. eva-maria.sehr@ait.ac.at.
Austrian Institute of Technology · ATMax Perutz Labs · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPolyploidy is very common in plants and can be seen as one of the key drivers in the domestication of crops and the establishment of important agronomic traits. It can be the main source of genomic repatterning and introduces gene duplications, affecting gene expression and alternative splicing. Since fully sequenced genomes are not yet available for many plant species including crops, de novo transcriptome assembly is the basis to understand molecular and functional mechanisms. However, in complex polyploid plants, de novo transcriptome assembly is challenging, leading to increased rates of fused or redundant transcripts. Since assemblers were developed mainly for diploid organisms, they may not well suited for polyploids. Also, comparative evaluations of these tools on higher polyploid plants are extremely rare. Thus, our aim was to fill this gap and to provide a basic guideline for choosing the optimal de novo assembly strategy focusing on autotetraploids, as the scientific interest in this type of polyploidy is steadily increasing.

resultsWe present a comparison of two common (SOAPdenovo-Trans, Trinity) and one recently published transcriptome assembler (TransLiG) on diploid and autotetraploid species of the genera Acer and Vaccinium using Arabidopsis thaliana as a reference. The number of assembled transcripts was up to 11 and 14 times higher with an increased number of short transcripts for Acer and Vaccinium, respectively, compared to A. thaliana. In diploid samples, Trinity and TransLiG performed similarly good while in autotetraploids, TransLiG assembled most complete transcriptomes with an average of 1916 assembled BUSCOs vs. 1705 BUSCOs for Trinity. Of all three assemblers, SOAPdenovo-Trans performed worst (1133 complete BUSCOs).

conclusionAll three assembly tools produced complete assemblies when dealing with the model organism A. thaliana, independently of its ploidy level, but their performances differed extremely when it comes to non-model autotetraploids, where specifically TransLiG and Trinity produced a high number of redundant transcripts. The recently published assembler TransLiG has not been tested yet on any plant organism but showed highest completeness and full-length transcriptomes, especially in autotetraploids. Including such species during the development and testing of new assembly tools is highly appreciated and recommended as many important crops are polyploid.

Indexed as

High-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingTranscriptomeGene Expression ProfilingHumansPolyploidySequence Analysis, RNAAutotetraploidDe novo transcriptome assemblyPlantsPolyploidRNA-seqTransLiG

Identifiers

PMID33752598
PMCPMC7986043
OpenAlexW3136327360

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.