↓ Skip to main content

Genomic repeats, misassembly and reannotation: a case study with long-read resequencing of Porphyromonas gingivalis reference strains

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 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
Genomic repeats, misassembly and reannotation: a case study with long-read resequencing of Porphyromonas gingivalis reference strains
Published in
BMC Genomics, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12864-017-4429-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luis Acuña-Amador, Aline Primot, Edouard Cadieu, Alain Roulet, Frédérique Barloy-Hubler

Abstract

Without knowledge of their genomic sequences, it is impossible to make functional models of the bacteria that make up human and animal microbiota. Unfortunately, the vast majority of publicly available genomes are only working drafts, an incompleteness that causes numerous problems and constitutes a major obstacle to genotypic and phenotypic interpretation. In this work, we began with an example from the class Bacteroidia in the phylum Bacteroidetes, which is preponderant among human orodigestive microbiota. We successfully identify the genetic loci responsible for assembly breaks and misassemblies and demonstrate the importance and usefulness of long-read sequencing and curated reannotation. We showed that the fragmentation in Bacteroidia draft genomes assembled from massively parallel sequencing linearly correlates with genomic repeats of the same or greater size than the reads. We also demonstrated that some of these repeats, especially the long ones, correspond to misassembled loci in three reference Porphyromonas gingivalis genomes marked as circularized (thus complete or finished). We prove that even at modest coverage (30X), long-read resequencing together with PCR contiguity verification (rrn operons and an integrative and conjugative element or ICE) can be used to identify and correct the wrongly combined or assembled regions. Finally, although time-consuming and labor-intensive, consistent manual biocuration of three P. gingivalis strains allowed us to compare and correct the existing genomic annotations, resulting in a more accurate interpretation of the genomic differences among these strains. In this study, we demonstrate the usefulness and importance of long-read sequencing in verifying published genomes (even when complete) and generating assemblies for new bacterial strains/species with high genomic plasticity. We also show that when combined with biological validation processes and diligent biocurated annotation, this strategy helps reduce the propagation of errors in shared databases, thus limiting false conclusions based on incomplete or misleading information.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 75 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 23%
Researcher 13 17%
Student > Master 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Other 5 7%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 15 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 24%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 4%
Unspecified 2 3%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 18 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 30 January 2018.
All research outputs
#5,479,119
of 23,102,082 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#2,157
of 10,709 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,839
of 442,463 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#50
of 219 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,102,082 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,709 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
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 442,463 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 219 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.