Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41920843›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2026

ntStat: k-mer characterization using occurrence statistics in raw sequencing data.

Parham Kazemi, Lauren Coombe, René L Warren, Inanc Birol

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 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

4 authors.

Parham KazemiBC Cancer Research Institute, Vancouver, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2126-5644
Lauren CoombeBC Cancer Research Institute, Vancouver, Canada.
René L WarrenBC Cancer Research Institute, Vancouver, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9890-2293
Inanc BirolBC Cancer Research Institute, Vancouver, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0950-7839

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

K-mer counts are fundamental in many genomic data analysis tasks, providing valuable information for genome assembly, error correction, and variant detection. State-of-the-art k-mer counting tools employ various techniques, such as parallelism, probabilistic data structures, and disk utilization, to efficiently extract k-mer frequencies from large datasets. The distribution of k-mer counts in raw sequencing reads reveals key genomic characteristics such as genome size, heterozygosity, and basecalling quality. The number of reads containing a k-mer has also shown application in genome assembly and sequence analysis. We present ntStat, a toolkit that employs succinct Bloom filter data structures to track both k-mer count and depth information and use in downstream applications. ntStat models the k-mer count histogram using evolutionary computation, and infers valuable insights about the genome, sequencing data, and individual k-mers, de novo. ntStat consistently ran faster than DSK, BFCounter, hackgap, and Squeakr in all of our tests. Jellyfish performed faster than ntStat for human data with k = 25 but fell behind with k = 64. KMC3 was faster overall but at a high disk usage and memory cost. ntStat also used less memory than other non-disk-based k-mer counters and typically, 99.5-99.9% of the k-mers processed by ntStat are counted correctly. ntStat's histogram analysis module detected heterozygosity percentages and k-mer coverage for long-read datasets simulated from a diploid human genome with less than 1% and 0.5-fold difference to the ground truth. The analysis of simulated long read datasets showed an average error of just 2% in k-mer robustness estimates.

Indexed as

GenomicsSequence Analysis, DNASoftwareAlgorithmsAnimalsComputational BiologyHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumans

Identifiers

PMID41920843
PMCPMC13056179

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.