Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40597599›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2025

Chimeric mis-annotations of genes remain pervasive in eukaryotic non-model organisms.

Andreas Bachler, Thomas K Walsh, Rahul V Rane, Gunjan Pandey

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Journal of genomics · 2026
    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

4 authors.

Andreas BachlerCSIRO, Black Mountain Laboratories, Clunies Ross Street, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia. Andy.Bachler@csiro.au.
Thomas K WalshCSIRO, Black Mountain Laboratories, Clunies Ross Street, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia.
Rahul V RaneCSIRO, 351 Royal Parade, Parkville, VIC, 3052, Australia.
Gunjan PandeyCSIRO, Black Mountain Laboratories, Clunies Ross Street, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccurate annotation of protein-coding genes is critical for genome analysis in non-model organisms. However, limited RNA-Seq data and incomplete protein resources can lead to errors, including chimeric gene mis-annotations, where two or more adjacent genes are incorrectly fused into a single model. These errors often persist due to annotation inertia, where mistakes are propagated and amplified through data sharing and reanalysis, and leads to cases where the mis-annotated model becomes favoured over the correct model. This complicates almost all downstream genomic analyses such as gene expression studies and comparative genomics.

resultsWe investigated chimeric mis-annotations across 30 recently annotated genomes spanning invertebrates, vertebrates, and plants, identifying 605 confirmed cases. The majority of these errors occurred in invertebrates and plants. Using structural prediction and splicing assessment, we demonstrated that utilising machine-learning annotation tools (such as Helixer) provides an approach which can identify mis-annotations.

conclusionsThis study highlights the prevalence of chimeric mis-annotations in genomic datasets and showcases the potential of machine-learning tools such as Helixer to refine gene models for highly variable gene families with mis-annotations present in databases. By addressing these annotation errors, we improve genomic data reliability and facilitate a deeper understanding of non-model organisms.

Indexed as

EukaryotaMolecular Sequence AnnotationAnimalsDatabases, GeneticGenomeGenomicsMachine LearningPlantsChimeric mis-annotationsGenome annotationNon-model organisms

Identifiers

PMID40597599
PMCPMC12220653

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.