ArticleNature biotechnology2026
Improving metagenome binning by integrating intrinsic features and taxonomy.
Article in Nature biotechnology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Shared biosynthetic architectures generate diverse β-amino polyketide residues in cyanobacterial peptides.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A common procedure for studying the microbiome is binning the sequenced contigs into metagenome-assembled genomes. State-of-the-art binning methods use coabundance and sequence-based motifs such as tetranucleotide frequencies, whereas taxonomic labels derived from alignment based classification have not been widely used. Here we propose TaxVAMB, a metagenome binning tool based on semisupervised bimodal variational autoencoders, combining tetranucleotide frequencies and contig coabundances with taxonomic information. TaxVAMB outperformed all other binners on CAMI2 human microbiome datasets, returning on average 29% more high-quality assemblies than the next best binner, and performed on par with the best binners on short-read datasets. On a human gut long-read dataset, TaxVAMB recovered 29% more high-quality bins. In a typical single-sample setup, TaxVAMB on average returns 83% more high-quality bins compared to VAMB. Lastly, TaxVAMB binned incomplete genomes better than any other tool, returning on average 300% more high-quality bins of incomplete genomes than the next best binner.
Identifiers
42045408What 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.