Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41394079›Full record

ReviewBioinformatics advances2025

An overview of computational methods for gene prediction in eukaryotes: strengths, limitations, and future directions.

Abigail Djossou, Wend Yam D D Ouedraogo, Aida Ouangraoua

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Bioinformatics advances, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Abigail DjossouDepartment of Computer Science, Universite de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, J1K 2R1, Canada.
Wend Yam D D OuedraogoDepartment of Computer Science, Universite de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, J1K 2R1, Canada.
Aida OuangraouaDepartment of Computer Science, Universite de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, J1K 2R1, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2040-4948

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Summary: Advances in Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) and machine-learning methods have improved eukaryotic gene prediction. Despite this progress, computational prediction remains crucial for complementing empirical data and annotating newly sequenced genomes, given the complexity of eukaryotic gene structures. Recent deep-learning approaches further enhance accuracy by learning gene-structure patterns directly from genomic sequences, enabling stronger cross-species generalization without predefined gene models. This review introduces a new classification of gene prediction methods-gene-model-based, gene-model-free, and hybrid-and examines representative tools with respect to their algorithmic strategies, input data, strengths, and limitations. It also updates previously reported challenges and outlines new issues arising from modern deep-learning techniques. To support these discussions, we extended the G3PO benchmark of gene-model-based predictors (Augustus, GenScan, GeneID, GlimmerHMM, and SNAP) to additionally include a gene-model-free method, sensor-NN, and a hybrid method, Helixer. Availability and implementation: Benchmark DNA and protein sequences are available in the G3PO repository (http://git.lbgi.fr/scalzitti/Benchmark_study). Scripts for Augustus and Helixer, along with all prediction outputs, are accessible at https://github.com/UdeS-CoBIUS/GenePredictionReviewBenchmark.

Identifiers

PMID41394079
PMCPMC12701808

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.