ArticlePeerJ2021
Rephine.r: a pipeline for correcting gene calls and clusters to improve phage pangenomes and phylogenies.
Article in PeerJ, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- PyamilySeq: exposing the fragility of conventional gene (re)clustering and prokaryotic pangenomic inference methods.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Computational Tools for the Analysis of Uncultivated Phage Genomes.Microbiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR · 2022Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA pangenome is the collection of all genes found in a set of related genomes. For microbes, these genomes are often different strains of the same species, and the pangenome offers a means to compare gene content variation with differences in phenotypes, ecology, and phylogenetic relatedness. Though most frequently applied to bacteria, there is growing interest in adapting pangenome analysis to bacteriophages. However, working with phage genomes presents new challenges. First, most phage families are under-sampled, and homologous genes in related viruses can be difficult to identify. Second, homing endonucleases and intron-like sequences may be present, resulting in fragmented gene calls. Each of these issues can reduce the accuracy of standard pangenome analysis tools.
methodsWe developed an R pipeline called Rephine.r that takes as input the gene clusters produced by an initial pangenomics workflow. Rephine.r then proceeds in two primary steps. First, it identifies three common causes of fragmented gene calls: (1) indels creating early stop codons and new start codons; (2) interruption by a selfish genetic element; and (3) splitting at the ends of the reported genome. Fragmented genes are then fused to create new sequence alignments. In tandem, Rephine.r searches for distant homologs separated into different gene families using Hidden Markov Models. Significant hits are used to merge families into larger clusters. A final round of fragment identification is then run, and results may be used to infer single-copy core genomes and phylogenetic trees.
resultsWe applied Rephine.r to three well-studied phage groups: the Tevenvirinae (e.g., T4), the Studiervirinae (e.g., T7), and the Pbunaviruses (e.g., PB1). In each case, Rephine.r recovered additional members of the single-copy core genome and increased the overall bootstrap support of the phylogeny. The Rephine.r pipeline is provided through GitHub (https://www.github.com/coevoeco/Rephine.r) as a single script for automated analysis and with utility functions to assist in building single-copy core genomes and predicting the sources of fragmented genes.
Indexed as
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.