↓ Skip to main content

Single molecule sequencing-guided scaffolding and correction of draft assemblies

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
11 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Single molecule sequencing-guided scaffolding and correction of draft assemblies
Published in
BMC Genomics, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12864-017-4271-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shenglong Zhu, Danny Z. Chen, Scott J. Emrich

Abstract

Although single molecule sequencing is still improving, the lengths of the generated sequences are inevitably an advantage in genome assembly. Prior work that utilizes long reads to conduct genome assembly has mostly focused on correcting sequencing errors and improving contiguity of de novo assemblies. We propose a disassembling-reassembling approach for both correcting structural errors in the draft assembly and scaffolding a target assembly based on error-corrected single molecule sequences. To achieve this goal, we formulate a maximum alternating path cover problem. We prove that this problem is NP-hard, and solve it by a 2-approximation algorithm. Our experimental results show that our approach can improve the structural correctness of target assemblies in the cost of some contiguity, even with smaller amounts of long reads. In addition, our reassembling process can also serve as a competitive scaffolder relative to well-established assembly benchmarks.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 11 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 27%
Student > Bachelor 2 18%
Unspecified 1 9%
Lecturer 1 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 9%
Other 1 9%
Unknown 2 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 45%
Unspecified 1 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 9%
Unknown 3 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 December 2017.
All research outputs
#17,921,555
of 23,011,300 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#7,614
of 10,697 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#307,294
of 439,982 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#155
of 228 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,011,300 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,697 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 439,982 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 228 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.