4.7 Review

A comprehensive review of scaffolding methods in genome assembly

期刊

BRIEFINGS IN BIOINFORMATICS
卷 22, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/bib/bbab033

关键词

genome assembly; scaffolding; alignments; long-range sequencing

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61972134, 61602156, 61802113, 61772557, 11601129]
  2. Henan Provincial Department of Science and Technology Research Project [192102210118]
  3. Doctor Foundation of Henan Polytechnic University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article discusses the significance of scaffolding methods in genome assembly and the challenges they face, as well as the impact of various types of reads on assembly quality. It emphasizes the importance of researchers gaining a deep understanding of the latest scaffolding methods to address these challenges.
In the field of genome assembly, scaffolding methods make it possible to obtain a more complete and contiguous reference genome, which is the cornerstone of genomic research. Scaffolding methods typically utilize the alignments between contigs and sequencing data (reads) to determine the orientation and order among contigs and to produce longer scaffolds, which are helpful for genomic downstream analysis. With the rapid development of high-throughput sequencing technologies, diverse types of reads have emerged over the past decade, especially in long-range sequencing, which have greatly enhanced the assembly quality of scaffolding methods. As the number of scaffolding methods increases, biology and bioinformatics researchers need to perform in-depth analyses of state-of-the-art scaffolding methods. In this article, we focus on the difficulties in scaffolding, the differences in characteristics among various kinds of reads, the methods by which current scaffolding methods address these difficulties, and future research opportunities. We hope this work will benefit the design of new scaffolding methods and the selection of appropriate scaffolding methods for specific biological studies.

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

4.7
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