ArticleJournal of animal science2025
Short communication: imputation accuracy of host genomic data from metagenomic sequence information.
Article in Journal of animal science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Metagenomic sequencing is the process of extracting all the genomic information from a given sample. Most metagenomic studies remove any host reads as a matter of course. However, host reads can be used as the basis for genotype imputation to obtain whole genomic sequences. The accuracy of these imputed genotypic calls from a bovine ocular sample was determined by comparing results to those from a commercial array. Overall, imputed genotype calls proved to have a high concordance with array genotype calls (average concordance of 83% and correlation of 0.81 with no filtering). Accuracy increased as filters for host read depth and imputed call confidence were implemented. With filters in place, the average percent concordance was 98% (88% to 99%) while the mean correlation was 0.98 (0.89 to 0.99). Further, identity verification of the metagenomic samples can be carried out if the host is genotyped on another platform.
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.