Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38188174›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2024

Metagenomic assembly is the main bottleneck in the identification of mobile genetic elements.

Jesse J Kerkvliet, Alex Bossers, Jannigje G Kers, Rodrigo Meneses, Rob Willems, Anita C Schürch

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
14.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Sulfonamide resistance geneMicrobiology spectrum · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. High-resolution metagenome assembly for modern long reads with myloasm.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jesse J KerkvlietDepartment of Medical Microbiology, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Alex BossersUtrecht University, Institute for Risk Assessment Sciences, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Jannigje G KersUtrecht University, Institute for Risk Assessment Sciences, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Rodrigo MenesesDepartment of Medical Microbiology, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Rob WillemsDepartment of Medical Microbiology, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Anita C SchürchDepartment of Medical Microbiology, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
University Medical Center Utrecht · NLUtrecht University · NLWageningen University & Research · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Antimicrobial resistance genes (ARG) are commonly found on acquired mobile genetic elements (MGEs) such as plasmids or transposons. Understanding the spread of resistance genes associated with mobile elements (mARGs) across different hosts and environments requires linking ARGs to the existing mobile reservoir within bacterial communities. However, reconstructing mARGs in metagenomic data from diverse ecosystems poses computational challenges, including genome fragment reconstruction (assembly), high-throughput annotation of MGEs, and identification of their association with ARGs. Recently, several bioinformatics tools have been developed to identify assembled fragments of plasmids, phages, and insertion sequence (IS) elements in metagenomic data. These methods can help in understanding the dissemination of mARGs. To streamline the process of identifying mARGs in multiple samples, we combined these tools in an automated high-throughput open-source pipeline, MetaMobilePicker, that identifies ARGs associated with plasmids, IS elements and phages, starting from short metagenomic sequencing reads. This pipeline was used to identify these three elements on a simplified simulated metagenome dataset, comprising whole genome sequences from seven clinically relevant bacterial species containing 55 ARGs, nine plasmids and five phages. The results demonstrated moderate precision for the identification of plasmids (0.57) and phages (0.71), and moderate sensitivity of identification of IS elements (0.58) and ARGs (0.70). In this study, we aim to assess the main causes of this moderate performance of the MGE prediction tools in a comprehensive manner. We conducted a systematic benchmark, considering metagenomic read coverage, contig length cutoffs and investigating the performance of the classification algorithms. Our analysis revealed that the metagenomic assembly process is the primary bottleneck when linking ARGs to identified MGEs in short-read metagenomics sequencing experiments rather than ARGs and MGEs identification by the different tools.

Indexed as

BacteriophagesMetagenomeAlgorithmsDNA Transposable ElementsEcosystemDNA Transposable ElementsBacteriaBacterialComputational biologyDrug resistanceMetagenomicsPlasmid

Identifiers

PMID38188174
PMCPMC10771768
OpenAlexW4390582429

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.