Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41625147›Full record

ReviewNAR genomics and bioinformatics2026

Evolutionary and methodological considerations when interpreting gene presence-absence variation in pangenomes.

Tomáš Brůna, Avinash Sreedasyam, Avril M Harder, John T Lovell

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in NAR genomics and bioinformatics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. 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.

Tomáš BrůnaDOE Joint Genome Institute, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 1 Cyclotron Road, Berkeley, CA 94720, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9811-5532
Avinash SreedasyamDOE Joint Genome Institute, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 1 Cyclotron Road, Berkeley, CA 94720, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7336-7012
Avril M HarderGenome Sequencing Center, HudsonAlpha Institute for Biotechnology, Huntsville, AL 35806, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7371-4002
John T LovellDOE Joint Genome Institute, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 1 Cyclotron Road, Berkeley, CA 94720, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8938-1166

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While graph-based pangenomes have become a standard and interoperable foundation for comparisons across multiple reference genomes, integrating protein-coding gene annotations across pangenomes in a single 'pangene set' remains challenging, both because of methodological inconsistency and biological presence-absence variation (PAV). Here, we review and experimentally evaluate the root of genome annotation and pangene set inconsistency using two polyploid plant pangenomes: cotton and soybean, which were chosen because of their existing diverse high-quality genomic resources and the known importance of gene PAV in their respective breeding programs. We first demonstrate that building pangene sets across different genome resources is highly error prone: PAV calculated directly from the genome annotations hosted on public repositories recapitulates structure in annotation methods and not biological sequence differences. Re-annotation of all genomes with a single identical pipeline largely resolves the broadest stroke issues; however, substantial challenges remain, including a surprisingly common case where exactly identical sequences have different gene model structural annotations. Combined, these results clearly show that pangenome gene model annotations must be carefully integrated before any biological inference can be made regarding sequence evolution, gene copy-number, or PAV.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularGenetic VariationGenome, PlantGenomicsGlycine maxGossypiumMolecular Sequence Annotation

Identifiers

PMID41625147
PMCPMC12856356

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.