ArticlePeerJ2022
A pipeline for assembling low copy nuclear markers from plant genome skimming data for phylogenetic use.
Article in PeerJ, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genome skimming with nanopore sequencing precisely determines global and transposon DNA methylation in vertebrates.Genome research · 2023Article
- Genome Skimming with Nanopore Sequencing Precisely Determines Global and Transposon DNA Methylation in Vertebrates.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 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
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Genome skimming is a popular method in plant phylogenomics that do not include a biased enrichment step, relying on random shallow sequencing of total genomic DNA. From these data the plastome is usually readily assembled and constitutes the bulk of phylogenetic information generated in these studies. Despite a few attempts to use genome skims to recover low copy nuclear loci for direct phylogenetic use, such endeavor remains neglected. Causes might include the trade-off between libraries with few reads and species with large genomes ( Methods: A pipeline and its companion R package designed to automate the recovery of low copy nuclear markers from genome skimming libraries are presented. Additionally, a series of analyses aiming to evaluate the impact of key assembling parameters, reference selection and missing data are presented. Results: A substantial amount of putative low copy nuclear loci was assembled and proved useful to base phylogenetic inference across the libraries tested (4 to 11 times more data than previously assembled plastomes from the same libraries). Discussion: Critical aspects of assembling low copy nuclear markers from genome skims include the minimum coverage and depth of a sequence to be used. More stringent values of these parameters reduces the amount of assembled data and increases the relative amount of missing data, which can compromise phylogenetic inference, in turn relaxing the same parameters might increase sequence error. These issues are discussed in the text, and parameter tuning through multiple comparisons tracking their effects on support and congruence is highly recommended when using this pipeline. The skimmingLoci pipeline (https://github.com/mreginato/skimmingLoci) might stimulate the use of genome skims to recover nuclear loci for direct phylogenetic use, increasing the power of genome skimming data to resolve phylogenetic relationships, while reducing the amount of sequenced DNA that is commonly wasted.
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.