Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42487208›Full record

ArticleGenetics2026

Toward standardization in arthropod and biodiversity genome projects.

Eric S Tvedte, Gregor Bucher, David M Luecke, David C Molik, Terrence Sylvester, Mark Blaxter, Christine G Elsik, Kerstin Howe, Duane D McKenna, Terence D Murphy and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

16 authors.

Eric S TvedteNational Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20894, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-1169-3079
Gregor BucherDepartment of Evolutionary Developmental Genetics, University of Göttingen, Johann-Friedrich-Blumenbach Institute, GZMB, 37077 Göttingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4615-6401
David M LueckeVeterinary Pest Genetics Research Unit, USDA, Agricultural Research Service, Kerrville, TX 78028, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-5309-9153
David C MolikCenter for Scholarly Publishing, Kansas State Libraries, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-3192-6538
Terrence SylvesterDepartment of Biological Sciences and Center for Biodiversity Research, University of Memphis, Memphis, TN 38152, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6683-0793
Mark BlaxterTree of Life, Wellcome Sanger Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SA, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-2861-949X
Christine G ElsikDivisions of Animal Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-4248-7713
Kerstin HoweTree of Life, Wellcome Sanger Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SA, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-2237-513X
Duane D McKennaDepartment of Biological Sciences and Center for Biodiversity Research, University of Memphis, Memphis, TN 38152, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-7823-8727
Terence D MurphyNational Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20894, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-9311-9745
Lukas SchraderInstitute for Evolution & Biodiversity, University of Münster, DE-48149 Muenster, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9863-0526
Cibele G Sotero-CaioTree of Life, Wellcome Sanger Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SA, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-3112-0000
Robert M WaterhouseEnvironmental Bioinformatics Group, SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-4199-9052
Anna K ChildersBee Research Laboratory, Beltsville Agricultural Research Center, USDA, Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville, MD 20705, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-0747-8539
Marc S HalfonDepartment of Biochemistry, University at Buffalo-State University of New York, Buffalo, NY 14203, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-4149-2705
Monica F PoelchauNational Agricultural Library, USDA, Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville, MD 20705, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-4584-6056

Funding

REDfly: The regulatory sequence resource for Drosophila and other insectsU24GM142435 · NIGMS · STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BUFFALO · PI HALFON, MARC S · 2021 to 2023
$1.4M
National Center for Biotechnology InformationNIGMS NIH HHS U24 GM142435NIH HHSNIH HHS U24 GM142435NLM NIH HHSNSF DEB2110053U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, many high-quality reference genome sequences for arthropod species have been generated. Although most genome papers describe their protocols and metrics, no consensus exists on the data that should be included in genome reports. Here, we review current standards across seven key stages of an arthropod genome project (budgeting, sourcing and vouchering, sample preparation and sequencing, genome assembly, analysis reproducibility, databasing, and genome annotation) and identify persistent gaps in standards as well as their implementation. To assess current standards reporting in the community, we surveyed 100 arthropod genome papers published in 2024. The use of long reads to assemble highly contiguous arthropod genomes is now standard practice when adequate input DNA is available, and basic assembly contiguity and conserved gene content statistics are consistently reported. However, there is less standardization in pre- and post-assembly procedures and metrics. When comparing Darwin Tree of Life (DToL) genome notes to other journals, publications from the latter group were less likely to describe compliance with ethical collection practices, sample vouchering, post-assembly curation steps, and assembly quality metrics beyond basic contiguity and completeness values. Genome annotation practices are highly variable: some genome note formats do not explicitly require annotation, and while the reporting rate of protein-coding gene annotations is higher in non-DToL publications, the submission rate of annotations to centralized sequence databases is much lower. Our findings highlight critical opportunities to harmonize reporting standards and promote their dissemination, ensuring that future arthropod genomes are both comparable and maximally reusable for large-scale comparative and applied research.

Indexed as

ArthropodsBiodiversityGenomeGenomicsAnimalsMolecular Sequence AnnotationEarth BioGenome Projectgenome assemblygenome metricsi5k initiative

Identifiers

PMID42487208
PMCPMC13535239

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.