Get your high-quality low-cost genome sequence

Trends in Plant Science

Volumn 19, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 288-291

  Faino, Luigi ^a   Thomma, Bart P H J ^a  

^a WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Eukaryote; Fungal genome; Genome structure; Hybrid assembly; Next generation sequencing (NGS); Repetitive element

Indexed keywords

EUKARYOTA;

DNA SEQUENCE; ECONOMICS; GENE LIBRARY; GENETICS; HIGH THROUGHPUT SEQUENCING; PLANT; PLANT GENOME; PROCEDURES; STANDARDS; SYSTEMS BIOLOGY;

GENE LIBRARY; GENOME, PLANT; HIGH-THROUGHPUT NUCLEOTIDE SEQUENCING; PLANTS; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS, DNA; SYSTEMS BIOLOGY;

EID: 84899991727     PISSN: 13601385     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tplants.2014.02.003     Document Type: Short Survey

References (30)

1. Goffeau A., et al. Life with 6000 genes. Science 1996, 274:546-567.
2. Quail M.A., et al. A tale of three next generation sequencing platforms: comparison of Ion Torrent, Pacific Biosciences and Illumina MiSeq sequencers. BMC Genomics 2012, 13:341.
3. Shin S.C., et al. Advantages of single-molecule real-time sequencing in high-GC content genomes. PLoS ONE 2013, 8:e68824.
4. Oyola S.O., et al. Optimizing Illumina next-generation sequencing library preparation for extremely AT-biased genomes. BMC Genomics 2012, 13:1.
5. Chin C-S., et al. Nonhybrid, finished microbial genome assemblies from long-read SMRT sequencing data. Nat. Methods 2013, 10:563-569.
6. Yang X., et al. A survey of error-correction methods for next-generation sequencing. Brief. Bioinform. 2013, 14:56-66.
7. Simpson J.T., Durbin R. Efficient de novo assembly of large genomes using compressed data structures. Genome Res. 2012, 22:549-556.
8. Lassmann T., et al. TagDust: a program to eliminate artifacts from next generation sequencing data. Bioinformatics 2009, 25:2839-2840.
9. Earl D., et al. Assemblathon 1: a competitive assessment of de novo short read assembly methods. Genome Res. 2011, 21:2224-2241.
10. Bradnam K.R., et al. Assemblathon 2: evaluating de novo methods of genome assembly in three vertebrate species. GigaScience 2013, 2:1-31.
11. Boetzer M., et al. Scaffolding pre-assembled contigs using SSPACE. Bioinformatics 2011, 27:578-579.
12. Tritt A., et al. An integrated pipeline for de novo assembly of microbial genomes. PLoS ONE 2012, 7:e42304.
13. Tsai I.J., et al. Improving draft assemblies by iterative mapping and assembly of short reads to eliminate gaps. Genome Biol. 2010, 11:R41.
14. Zerbino D.R., Birney E. Velvet: algorithms for de novo short read assembly using de Bruijn graphs. Genome Res. 2008, 18:821.
15. Koren S., et al. Hybrid error correction and de novo assembly of single-molecule sequencing reads. Nat. Biotechnol. 2012, 30:692-697.
16. English A.C., et al. Mind the gap: upgrading genomes with Pacific Biosciences RS long-read sequencing technology. PLoS ONE 2012, 7:e47768.
17. Bao Z., Eddy S.R. Automated de novo identification of repeat sequence families in sequenced genomes. Genome Res. 2002, 12:1269-1276.
18. Smit, A. et al. (2006) 1996-2004. RepeatMasker Open-3.0. http://www.repeatmasker.org.
19. Yandell M., Ence D. A beginner's guide to eukaryotic genome annotation. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2012, 13:329-342.
20. Slater G.S., Birney E. Automated generation of heuristics for biological sequence comparison. BMC Bioinformatics 2005, 6:31.
21. Kent W.J. BLAT: the BLAST-like alignment tool. Genome Res. 2002, 12:656-664.
22. Camacho C., et al. BLAST+: architecture and applications. BMC Bioinformatics 2009, 10:421.
23. Trapnell C., et al. Transcript assembly and quantification by RNA-Seq reveals unannotated transcripts and isoform switching during cell differentiation. Nat. Biotechnol. 2010, 28:511-515.
24. Stanke M., et al. Using native and syntenically mapped cDNA alignments to improve de novo gene finding. Bioinformatics 2008, 24:637-644.
25. Korf I. Gene finding in novel genomes. BMC Bioinformatics 2004, 5:59.
26. Haas B.J., et al. Automated eukaryotic gene structure annotation using EVidenceModeler and the program to assemble spliced alignments. Genome Biol. 2008, 9:R7.
27. de Jonge R., et al. Tomato immune receptor Ve1 recognizes effector of multiple fungal pathogens uncovered by genome and RNA sequencing. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2012, 109:5110-5115.
28. de Jonge R., et al. Extensive chromosomal reshuffling drives evolution of virulence in an asexual pathogen. Genome Res. 2013, 23:1271-1282.
29. Gurevich A., et al. QUAST: quality assessment tool for genome assemblies. Bioinformatics 2013, 29:1072-1075.
30. Sharpton T.J., et al. Mechanisms of intron gain and loss in Cryptococcus. Genome Biol. 2008, 9:R24.