ArticleBMC biology2025
Universal orthologs infer deep phylogenies and improve genome quality assessments.
Article in BMC biology, 2025. 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.
- MeioBIOME: A snakemake workflow for the parallel analysis of meiofaunal genomes and host-associated bacteria/archaea.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Transcriptome Profiling of Leaves and Roots from Rooibos (Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Phyling: phylogenetic inference from annotated genomes.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2026Article
- On the origin, evolution, and maintenance of RNA editing.Nucleic acids research · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUniversal single-copy orthologs are the most conserved components of genomes. Although they are routinely used for studying evolutionary histories and assessing new assemblies, current methods do not incorporate information from available genomic data.
resultsHere, we first determine the influence of evolutionary history on universal gene content and find that across 11,098 genomes of plants, fungi, and animals comprising 2606 taxonomic groups, 215 groups significantly vary from their respective lineages in terms of BUSCO (Benchmarking Universal Single Copy Orthologs) completeness. Additionally, 169 groups display an elevated complement of duplicated orthologs, likely from ancestral whole genome duplication events. Secondly, we investigate the extent of taxonomic congruence in broad BUSCO-derived phylogenies. For 275 suitable families out of 543 tested, sites evolving at higher rates produce at most 23.84% more taxonomically concordant, and at least 46.15% less terminally variable phylogenies compared to lower-rate sites. We find that BUSCO concatenated and coalescent trees have comparable accuracy and conclude that higher rate sites from concatenated alignments produce the most congruent and least variable phylogenies. Finally, we show that undetected, yet pervasive BUSCO gene loss events lead to misrepresentations of assembly quality. To overcome this, we filter a Curated set of BUSCOs (CUSCOs) that provide up to 6.99% fewer false positives compared to the standard search and introduce novel methods for comparing assemblies using gene synteny.
conclusionsOverall, we highlight the importance of considering evolutionary histories during assembly evaluations and release the phyca software toolkit that reconstructs consistent phylogenies and offers more precise assembly assessments.
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.