ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2024
Label-guided seed-chain-extend alignment on annotated De Bruijn graphs.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- De Bruijn graphs for pangenomics: in-depth performance benchmarking of de Bruijn graph-based tools for read mapping.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Pangenome-based genome inference using integer programming.Genome research · 2025Article
- Article
- Integer programming framework for pangenome-based genome inference.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
motivationExponential growth in sequencing databases has motivated scalable De Bruijn graph-based (DBG) indexing for searching these data, using annotations to label nodes with sample IDs. Low-depth sequencing samples correspond to fragmented subgraphs, complicating finding the long contiguous walks required for alignment queries. Aligners that target single-labelled subgraphs reduce alignment lengths due to fragmentation, leading to low recall for long reads. While some (e.g. label-free) aligners partially overcome fragmentation by combining information from multiple samples, biologically irrelevant combinations in such approaches can inflate the search space or reduce accuracy.
resultsWe introduce a new scoring model, 'multi-label alignment' (MLA), for annotated DBGs. MLA leverages two new operations: To promote biologically relevant sample combinations, 'Label Change' incorporates more informative global sample similarity into local scores. To improve connectivity, 'Node Length Change' dynamically adjusts the DBG node length during traversal. Our fast, approximate, yet accurate MLA implementation has two key steps: a single-label seed-chain-extend aligner (SCA) and a multi-label chainer (MLC). SCA uses a traditional scoring model adapting recent chaining improvements to assembly graphs and provides a curated pool of alignments. MLC extracts seed anchors from SCAs alignments, produces multi-label chains using MLA scoring, then finally forms multi-label alignments. We show via substantial improvements in taxonomic classification accuracy that MLA produces biologically relevant alignments, decreasing average weighted UniFrac errors by 63.1%-66.8% and covering 45.5%-47.4% (median) more long-read query characters than state-of-the-art aligners. MLAs runtimes are competitive with label-combining alignment and substantially faster than single-label alignment. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The data, scripts, and instructions for generating our results are available at https://github.com/ratschlab/mla.
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.