Cargando…

Assessment of de novo assemblers for draft genomes: a case study with fungal genomes

BACKGROUND: Recently, large bio-projects dealing with the release of different genomes have transpired. Most of these projects use next-generation sequencing platforms. As a consequence, many de novo assembly tools have evolved to assemble the reads generated by these platforms. Each tool has its ow...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Abbas, Mostafa M, Malluhi, Qutaibah M, Balakrishnan, Ponnuraman
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4290589/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25521762
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-15-S9-S10
_version_ 1782352267865751552
author Abbas, Mostafa M
Malluhi, Qutaibah M
Balakrishnan, Ponnuraman
author_facet Abbas, Mostafa M
Malluhi, Qutaibah M
Balakrishnan, Ponnuraman
author_sort Abbas, Mostafa M
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Recently, large bio-projects dealing with the release of different genomes have transpired. Most of these projects use next-generation sequencing platforms. As a consequence, many de novo assembly tools have evolved to assemble the reads generated by these platforms. Each tool has its own inherent advantages and disadvantages, which make the selection of an appropriate tool a challenging task. RESULTS: We have evaluated the performance of frequently used de novo assemblers namely ABySS, IDBA-UD, Minia, SOAP, SPAdes, Sparse, and Velvet. These assemblers are assessed based on their output quality during the assembly process conducted over fungal data. We compared the performance of these assemblers by considering both computational as well as quality metrics. By analyzing these performance metrics, the assemblers are ranked and a procedure for choosing the candidate assembler is illustrated. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we propose an assessment method for the selection of de novo assemblers by considering their computational as well as quality metrics at the draft genome level. We divide the quality metrics into three groups: g1 measures the goodness of the assemblies, g2 measures the problems of the assemblies, and g3 measures the conservation elements in the assemblies. Our results demonstrate that the assemblers ABySS and IDBA-UD exhibit a good performance for the studied data from fungal genomes in terms of running time, memory, and quality. The results suggest that whole genome shotgun sequencing projects should make use of different assemblers by considering their merits.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4290589
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42905892015-01-15 Assessment of de novo assemblers for draft genomes: a case study with fungal genomes Abbas, Mostafa M Malluhi, Qutaibah M Balakrishnan, Ponnuraman BMC Genomics Research BACKGROUND: Recently, large bio-projects dealing with the release of different genomes have transpired. Most of these projects use next-generation sequencing platforms. As a consequence, many de novo assembly tools have evolved to assemble the reads generated by these platforms. Each tool has its own inherent advantages and disadvantages, which make the selection of an appropriate tool a challenging task. RESULTS: We have evaluated the performance of frequently used de novo assemblers namely ABySS, IDBA-UD, Minia, SOAP, SPAdes, Sparse, and Velvet. These assemblers are assessed based on their output quality during the assembly process conducted over fungal data. We compared the performance of these assemblers by considering both computational as well as quality metrics. By analyzing these performance metrics, the assemblers are ranked and a procedure for choosing the candidate assembler is illustrated. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we propose an assessment method for the selection of de novo assemblers by considering their computational as well as quality metrics at the draft genome level. We divide the quality metrics into three groups: g1 measures the goodness of the assemblies, g2 measures the problems of the assemblies, and g3 measures the conservation elements in the assemblies. Our results demonstrate that the assemblers ABySS and IDBA-UD exhibit a good performance for the studied data from fungal genomes in terms of running time, memory, and quality. The results suggest that whole genome shotgun sequencing projects should make use of different assemblers by considering their merits. BioMed Central 2014-12-08 /pmc/articles/PMC4290589/ /pubmed/25521762 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-15-S9-S10 Text en Copyright © 2014 Abbas et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Abbas, Mostafa M
Malluhi, Qutaibah M
Balakrishnan, Ponnuraman
Assessment of de novo assemblers for draft genomes: a case study with fungal genomes
title Assessment of de novo assemblers for draft genomes: a case study with fungal genomes
title_full Assessment of de novo assemblers for draft genomes: a case study with fungal genomes
title_fullStr Assessment of de novo assemblers for draft genomes: a case study with fungal genomes
title_full_unstemmed Assessment of de novo assemblers for draft genomes: a case study with fungal genomes
title_short Assessment of de novo assemblers for draft genomes: a case study with fungal genomes
title_sort assessment of de novo assemblers for draft genomes: a case study with fungal genomes
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4290589/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25521762
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-15-S9-S10
work_keys_str_mv AT abbasmostafam assessmentofdenovoassemblersfordraftgenomesacasestudywithfungalgenomes
AT malluhiqutaibahm assessmentofdenovoassemblersfordraftgenomesacasestudywithfungalgenomes
AT balakrishnanponnuraman assessmentofdenovoassemblersfordraftgenomesacasestudywithfungalgenomes