Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41714649›Full record

ArticleScientific data2026

Annotation of 200 Insect Genomes with BRAKER for Consistent Comparisons across Species.

Stepan Saenko, Katharina J Hoff, Mario Stanke

Abstract readDataset
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific data, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. AccuratebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Stepan SaenkoInstitute of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Greifswald, Greifswald, 17489, Germany. saenko.s.stepan@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-4925-1308
Katharina J HoffInstitute of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Greifswald, Greifswald, 17489, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-7333-8390
Mario StankeInstitute of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Greifswald, Greifswald, 17489, Germany.

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Research Foundation) STA 1009/15-1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The annotation of genomes progresses slower than their sequencing and assembly. Also, species that were previously annotated can benefit from reannotation using more recent RNA-Seq and protein data, as well as from state-of-the-art annotation methods whose accuracy has improved. Heterogeneous annotations performed with different tools and protein databases can introduce artifactual differences when comparing gene sets or gene structures between species. Recently, the BRAKER3 annotation pipeline was introduced that integrates evidence from RNA-Seq and a protein database. Here, we introduce an automated genome annotation workflow based on BRAKER3 that allows one to annotate a list of species with minimal manual intervention. We selected a diverse set of 200 insect species from different families, including 85 species previously lacking annotations in GenBank. Using currently available RNA-Seq and protein sequence data, we applied our automated workflow to annotate these genomes and conducted downstream analyses typically performed in comparative genomics studies. We present the resulting gene structures, protein sequences, gene ontology terms, orthologous gene groups and a species tree.

Indexed as

Genome, InsectInsectaMolecular Sequence AnnotationAnimals

Identifiers

PMID41714649
PMCPMC12923644

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.