ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2022
CALDERA: finding all significant de Bruijn subgraphs for bacterial GWAS.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Skin Infection Pathogenicity Associated with a Canine Microbiome Resident: Polygenic Architecture of Virulence Factors inAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- microGWAS: a computational pipeline to perform large-scale bacterial genome-wide association studies.Microbial genomics · 2025Article
- Graphite: painting genomes using a colored de Bruijn graph.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2024Article
- Article
- Genome-Wide Association Studies (GWAS) Approaches for the Detection of Genetic Variants Associated with Antibiotic Resistance: A Systematic Review.Microorganisms · 2023Review
- Reduced ambiguity and improved interpretability of bacterial genome-wide associations using gene-cluster-centricMicrobial genomics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
motivationGenome-wide association studies (GWAS), aiming to find genetic variants associated with a trait, have widely been used on bacteria to identify genetic determinants of drug resistance or hypervirulence. Recent bacterial GWAS methods usually rely on k-mers, whose presence in a genome can denote variants ranging from single-nucleotide polymorphisms to mobile genetic elements. This approach does not require a reference genome, making it easier to account for accessory genes. However, a same gene can exist in slightly different versions across different strains, leading to diluted effects.
resultsHere, we overcome this issue by testing covariates built from closed connected subgraphs (CCSs) of the de Bruijn graph defined over genomic k-mers. These covariates capture polymorphic genes as a single entity, improving k-mer-based GWAS both in terms of power and interpretability. However, a method naively testing all possible subgraphs would be powerless due to multiple testing corrections, and the mere exploration of these subgraphs would quickly become computationally intractable. The concept of testable hypothesis has successfully been used to address both problems in similar contexts. We leverage this concept to test all CCSs by proposing a novel enumeration scheme for these objects which fully exploits the pruning opportunity offered by testability, resulting in drastic improvements in computational efficiency. Our method integrates with existing visual tools to facilitate interpretation. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: We provide an implementation of our method, as well as code to reproduce all results at https://github.com/HectorRDB/Caldera_ISMB. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
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.