ArticleEnvironmental microbiome2022
Accurate prediction of metagenome-assembled genome completeness by MAGISTA, a random forest model built on alignment-free intra-bin statistics.
Article in Environmental microbiome, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- MiGPC: a comprehensive catalog of enzybiotics from environmental metagenomes.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- The pangenome: a statistical model, not a fixed biological property.Bioinformatics advances · 2026Review
- The unresolved struggle of 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing: a benchmarking analysis of clustering and denoising methods.Environmental microbiome · 2025Article
- Benchmarking short-, long- and hybrid-read assemblers for metagenome sequencing of complex microbial communities.Microbiology (Reading, England) · 2024Article
- CoCoPyE: feature engineering for learning and prediction of genome quality indices.GigaScience · 2024Article
- Effect of protein modification in synbiotic infant formula on probiotic metabolic activity and bacterial composition in an infant gut-model.Microbiome research reports · 2024Article
- Introduction to the principles and methods underlying the recovery of metagenome-assembled genomes from metagenomic data.MicrobiologyOpen · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough the total number of microbial taxa on Earth is under debate, it is clear that only a small fraction of these has been cultivated and validly named. Evidently, the inability to culture most bacteria outside of very specific conditions severely limits their characterization and further studies. In the last decade, a major part of the solution to this problem has been the use of metagenome sequencing, whereby the DNA of an entire microbial community is sequenced, followed by the in silico reconstruction of genomes of its novel component species. The large discrepancy between the number of sequenced type strain genomes (around 12,000) and total microbial diversity (10
resultsWe developed MAGISTA (metagenome-assembled genome intra-bin statistics assessment), a novel approach to assess metagenome-assembled genome quality that tackles some of the often-neglected drawbacks of current reference gene-based methods. MAGISTA is based on alignment-free distance distributions between contig fragments within metagenomic bins, rather than a set of reference genes. For proper training, a highly complex genomic DNA mock community was needed and constructed by pooling genomic DNA of 227 bacterial strains, specifically selected to obtain a wide variety representing the major phylogenetic lineages of cultivable bacteria.
conclusionsMAGISTA achieved a 20% reduction in root-mean-square error in comparison to the marker gene approach when tested on publicly available mock metagenomes. Furthermore, our highly complex genomic DNA mock community is a very valuable tool for benchmarking (new) metagenome analysis methods.
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.