ArticlePeerJ2026
A novel analysis workflow for simultaneous parsing prokaryotic and eukaryotic microbial genes from metagenomes.
Article in PeerJ, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Accurately predicting coding genes from metagenomic samples containing a high proportion of eukaryotic content remains a significant challenge. Novel and reliable methods for the simultaneous prediction of prokaryotic and eukaryotic microbial genes are crucial to address this. We evaluated gene prediction accuracy of MetaGeneMark and MetaEuk using representative genomes from diverse organisms. Based on these findings, we developed an innovative analytical workflow. This approach involves an initial prediction of eukaryotic genes using MetaEuk, followed by the masking of these predicted eukaryotic genes and any co-identified partial prokaryotic genes using a custom Perl script. Remaining prokaryotic genes are then predicted from the masked metagenome using MetaGeneMark or metaProdigal. This integrated strategy achieved similar quantities and average lengths of eukaryotic genes compared to using MetaEuk alone. Notably, the quantity of predicted prokaryotic genes and viral genes using the new workflow was 14-18% higher than that obtained with standalone prokaryotic predictors. Furthermore, validation on a mixed prokaryotic-eukaryotic metagenome demonstrated that our workflow yielded genes with significantly higher average lengths, indicating reduced fragmentation and improved gene integrity. This novel workflow effectively enables the rapid and comprehensive retrieval of high-quality prokaryotic and eukaryotic coding sequences from diverse metagenomes.
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.