4.5 Article

An improved genome assembly of the fluke Schistosoma japonicum

期刊

PLOS NEGLECTED TROPICAL DISEASES
卷 13, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0007612

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31725025, 91431104]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Schistosoma japonicum is a parasitic flatworm that causes human schistosomiasis, which is a significant cause of morbidity in China and the Philippines. A single draft genome was available for S. japonicum, yet this assembly is very fragmented and only covers 90% of the genome, which make it difficult to be applied as a reference in functional genome analysis and genes discovery. Findings In this study, we present a high-quality assembly of the fluke S. japonicum genome by combining 20 G (similar to 53X) long single molecule real time sequencing reads with 80 G (similar to 213X) Illumina paired-end reads. This improved genome assembly is approximately 370.5 Mb, with contig and scaffold N50 length of 871.9 kb and 1.09 Mb, representing 142.4-fold and 6.2-fold improvement over the released WGS-based assembly, respectively. Additionally, our assembly captured 85.2% complete and 4.6% partial eukaryotic Benchmarking Universal Single-Copy Orthologs. Repetitive elements account for 46.80% of the genome, and 10,089 of the protein-coding genes were predicted from the improved genome, of which 96.5% have been functionally annotated. Lastly, using the improved assembly, we identified 20 significantly expanded gene families in S. japonicum, and those genes were primarily enriched in functions of proteolysis and protein glycosylation. Conclusions Using the combination of PacBio and Illumina Sequencing technologies, we provided an improved high-quality genome of S. japonicum. This improved genome assembly, as well as the annotation, will be useful for the comparative genomics of the flukes and more importantly facilitate the molecular studies of this important parasite in the future.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据