Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41553355›Full record

ArticleGigaScience2026

Dynamont: A comprehensive cross-species comparison of ONT segmentation tools.

Jannes Spangenberg, Christian Höner Zu Siederdissen, Winfried Goettsch, Lennart Köhler, Liz Maria Luke, Kai Papenfort, Manja Marz

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in GigaScience, 2026. 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

7 authors.

Jannes SpangenbergRNA Bioinformatics and High-Throughput Analysis, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, 07743 Jena, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6126-411X
Christian Höner Zu SiederdissenRNA Bioinformatics and High-Throughput Analysis, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, 07743 Jena, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9517-5839
Winfried GoettschRNA Bioinformatics and High-Throughput Analysis, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, 07743 Jena, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1015-0726
Lennart KöhlerRNA Bioinformatics and High-Throughput Analysis, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, 07743 Jena, Germany.
Liz Maria LukeInstitute of Microbiology, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, 07743 Jena, Germany.ORCID 0009-0001-9588-9097
Kai PapenfortInstitute of Microbiology, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, 07743 Jena, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5560-9804
Manja MarzRNA Bioinformatics and High-Throughput Analysis, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, 07743 Jena, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4783-8823

Funding

BMBF 01GR2305B.TP7DFG 390713860European Research Council CoG-101088027TMWWDG FKZ5575/10-9
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT) sequencing enables direct, long-read sequencing of DNA and RNA, preserving nucleotide modifications. During basecalling, deep neural networks translate raw nanopore signals into nucleotide sequences, internally segmenting the signal to align it with the corresponding bases. This is a challenging task due to uneven motor protein rotation, signal variability, low-quality reads, and the presence of nucleotide modifications. However, the signal to nucleotide assignment is critical for novel downstream signal analysis. Existing tools, such as Tombo Resquiggle, f5c Eventalign, f5c Resquiggle, and Uncalled4, operate after basecalling and rely on event-based segmentation and mapping approaches that often fail to align low-quality or modified reads and lack confidence estimates for segmentation accuracy.

resultsHere, we present a large-scale comparative study in which 5 segmentation tools, including our novel tool Dynamont, are applied to 16 ONT-sequenced datasets spanning different kingdoms of life. Overall, we segmented 160,000 reads and evaluated the tools' performance on a combination of 12 signal and downstream assembly metrics. Our study is accompanied by a comprehensive and extensible supplement that summarizes all datasets, execution instructions, and evaluation results. We score the segmentation results using an aggregated metric score, created from all our analyzed metrics.

conclusionsNo tool delivered the best results for all datasets. We recommend a careful choice and normalization of evaluation metrics to select the best segmentation tool as a critical step in the process of ONT signal segmentation. Across nearly all RNA datasets, Dynamont outperforms other segmentation tools in terms of aggregated metric scores. For DNA datasets, however, the performance is more variable, with mixed results observed across tools.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingNanopore SequencingSoftwareAlgorithmsAnimalsHumansSequence Analysis, DNAbasecallingbenchmarkingdirect RNA sequencing (DRS)dynamic time warping (DTW)event detectionhidden Markov model (HMM)k-mer modelsOxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT)RNA modificationssignal segmentation

Identifiers

PMID41553355
PMCPMC13014473

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.