Metassembler: Merging and optimizing de novo genome assemblies

Genome Biology

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 2015, Pages

  Wences, Alejandro Hernandez ^a,b   Schatz, Michael C ^a  

^a Simons Center for Quantitative Biology   (United States)

^b INSTITUTO DE CIENCIAS FÍSICAS   (Mexico)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIRD; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CONTROLLED STUDY; FISH; GENE REARRANGEMENT; GENE SEQUENCE; GENETIC ALGORITHM; GENETIC ANALYSIS; GENOME ASSEMBLY; METASSEMBLY ALGORITHM; NONHUMAN; PROCESS DESIGN; QUALITY CONTROL; SEQUENCE ALIGNMENT; SIMULATION; SNAKE; ALGORITHM; DNA SEQUENCE; GENOMICS; HIGH THROUGHPUT SEQUENCING; HUMAN; PROCEDURES; SOFTWARE;

ALGORITHMS; GENOMICS; HIGH-THROUGHPUT NUCLEOTIDE SEQUENCING; HUMANS; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS, DNA; SOFTWARE;

EID: 84942253473     PISSN: 14747596     EISSN: 1474760X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s13059-015-0764-4     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Mardis ER. The impact of next-generation sequencing technology on genetics. Trends Genet. 2008;24:133-41.
2. Schatz MC, Delcher AL, Salzberg SL. Assembly of large genomes using second-generation sequencing. Genome Res. 2010;20:1165-73.
3. Roberts RJ, Carneiro MO, Schatz MC. The advantages of SMRT sequencing. Genome Biol. 2013;14:405.
4. Schatz MC, Witkowski J, McCombie WR. Current challenges in de novo plant genome sequencing and assembly. Genome Biol. 2012;13:243.
5. Pop M. Genome assembly reborn: recent computational challenges. Brief Bioinform. 2009;10:354-66.
6. Earl D et al. Assemblathon 1: a competitive assessment of de novo short read assembly methods. Genome Res. 2011;21:2224-41.
7. Bradnam K R, Fass J N, Alexandrov A, Baranay P, Bechner M, Birol I, et al. (2013). Assemblathon 2: evaluating de novo methods of genome assembly in three vertebrate species. GigaScience, 2(1), 1-31.
8. Salzberg SL, Phillippy AM, Zimin A, Puiu D, Magoc T, Koren S, et al. GAGE: A critical evaluation of genome assemblies and assembly algorithms. Genome Res. 2012;22:557-67.
9. Parra G, Bradnam K, Ning Z, Keane T, Korf I. Assessing the gene space in draft genomes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2009;37:289-97.
10. Hunt M, Kikuchi T, Sanders M, Newbold C, Berriman M, Otto TD. REAPR: a universal tool for genome assembly evaluation. Genome Biol. 2013;14:R47.
11. Schatz MC, Phillippy AM, Sommer DD, Delcher AL, Puiu D, Narzisi G, et al. (2013). Hawkeye and AMOS: visualizing and assessing the quality of genome assemblies. Briefings in Bioinformatics. 14 (2):213-24.
12. Rahman A, Pachter L. CGAL: computing genome assembly likelihoods. Genome Biol. 2013;14:R8.
13. Zimin AV, Smith DR, Sutton G, Yorke JA. Assembly reconciliation. Bioinformatics. 2008;24:42-5.
14. Vicedomini R, Vezzi F, Scalabrin S, Arvestad L, Policriti A. GAM-NGS: genomic assemblies merger for next generation sequencing. BMC Bioinformatics. 2013;14:S6.
15. Soto-Jimenez LM, Estrada K, Sanchez-Flores A. GARM: genome assembly, reconciliation and merging pipeline. Curr Top Med Chem. 2014;14:418-24.
16. Nijkamp J, Winterbach W, van den Broek M, Daran JM, Reinders M, de Ridder D. Integrating genome assemblies with MAIA. Bioinformatics. 2010;26:i433-9.
17. metassembler. http://metassembler.sourceforge.net.
18. Edgar RC, Asimenos G, Batzoglou S, Sidow A (2015) Evolver. http://www.drive5.com/evolver/.
19. Marbach D, Costello JC, Küffner R, Vega NM, Prill RJ, Camacho DM, et al. Wisdom of crowds for robust gene network inference. Nat Methods. 2012;9:796-804.
20. Kurtz S, Phillippy A, Delcher AL, Smoot M, Shumway M, Antonescu C, et al. Versatile and open software for comparing large genomes. Genome Biol. 2004;5:R12.
21. Langmead B, Salzberg SL. Fast gapped-read alignment with Bowtie 2. Nat Methods. 2012;9:357-9.
22. Assemblathon 1 datasets. http://korflab.ucdavis.edu/Datasets/Assemblathon/Assemblathon1/.
23. Assemblathon 2 assemblies. http://gigadb.org/dataset/100060.