4.7 Article

Cydrasil 3, a curated 16S rRNA gene reference package and web app for cyanobacterial phylogenetic placement

期刊

SCIENTIFIC DATA
卷 8, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41597-021-01015-5

关键词

-

资金

  1. Center for Bio-mediated and Bio-inspired Geotechnics (NSF) [1449501]
  2. NSF [1224939]
  3. Directorate For Engineering
  4. Div Of Engineering Education and Centers [1449501] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  5. Directorate For Geosciences
  6. Division Of Earth Sciences [1224939] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cydrasil 3 is a curated 16S rRNA gene reference package, database, and web application designed to provide a full phylogenetic perspective for cyanobacterial systematics and routine identification.
Cyanobacteria are a widespread and important bacterial phylum, responsible for a significant portion of global carbon and nitrogen fixation. Unfortunately, reliable and accurate automated classification of cyanobacterial 16S rRNA gene sequences is muddled by conflicting systematic frameworks, inconsistent taxonomic definitions (including the phylum itself), and database errors. To address this, we introduce Cydrasil 3 (https://www.cydrasil.org), a curated 16S rRNA gene reference package, database, and web application designed to provide a full phylogenetic perspective for cyanobacterial systematics and routine identification. Cydrasil 3 contains over 1300 manually curated sequences longer than 1100 base pairs and can be used for phylogenetic placement or as a reference sequence set for de novo phylogenetic reconstructions. The web application (utilizing PaPaRA and EPA-ng) can place thousands of sequences into the reference tree and has detailed instructions on how to analyze results. While the Cydrasil web application offers no taxonomic assignments, it instead provides phylogenetic placement, as well as a searchable database with curation notes and metadata, and a mechanism for community feedback.

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