Welcome to the big leaves: Best practices for improving genome annotation in non-model plant genomes

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
Vidya S. Vuruputoor, Daniel Monyak, Karl C. Fetter, Cynthia Webster, Akriti Bhattarai, Bikash Shrestha, Sumaira Zaman, Jeremy Bennett, Susan L. McEvoy, Madison Caballero, Jill L. Wegrzyn
{"title":"Welcome to the big leaves: Best practices for improving genome annotation in non-model plant genomes","authors":"Vidya S. Vuruputoor,&nbsp;Daniel Monyak,&nbsp;Karl C. Fetter,&nbsp;Cynthia Webster,&nbsp;Akriti Bhattarai,&nbsp;Bikash Shrestha,&nbsp;Sumaira Zaman,&nbsp;Jeremy Bennett,&nbsp;Susan L. McEvoy,&nbsp;Madison Caballero,&nbsp;Jill L. Wegrzyn","doi":"10.1002/aps3.11533","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Premise</h3>\n \n <p>Robust standards to evaluate quality and completeness are lacking in eukaryotic structural genome annotation, as genome annotation software is developed using model organisms and typically lacks benchmarking to comprehensively evaluate the quality and accuracy of the final predictions. The annotation of plant genomes is particularly challenging due to their large sizes, abundant transposable elements, and variable ploidies. This study investigates the impact of genome quality, complexity, sequence read input, and method on protein-coding gene predictions.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>The impact of repeat masking, long-read and short-read inputs, and de novo and genome-guided protein evidence was examined in the context of the popular BRAKER and MAKER workflows for five plant genomes. The annotations were benchmarked for structural traits and sequence similarity.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Benchmarks that reflect gene structures, reciprocal similarity search alignments, and mono-exonic/multi-exonic gene counts provide a more complete view of annotation accuracy. Transcripts derived from RNA-read alignments alone are not sufficient for genome annotation. Gene prediction workflows that combine evidence-based and ab initio approaches are recommended, and a combination of short and long reads can improve genome annotation. Adding protein evidence from de novo assemblies, genome-guided transcriptome assemblies, or full-length proteins from OrthoDB generates more putative false positives as implemented in the current workflows. Post-processing with functional and structural filters is highly recommended.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Discussion</h3>\n \n <p>While the annotation of non-model plant genomes remains complex, this study provides recommendations for inputs and methodological approaches. We discuss a set of best practices to generate an optimal plant genome annotation and present a more robust set of metrics to evaluate the resulting predictions.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://bsapubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/aps3.11533","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/aps3.11533","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Premise

Robust standards to evaluate quality and completeness are lacking in eukaryotic structural genome annotation, as genome annotation software is developed using model organisms and typically lacks benchmarking to comprehensively evaluate the quality and accuracy of the final predictions. The annotation of plant genomes is particularly challenging due to their large sizes, abundant transposable elements, and variable ploidies. This study investigates the impact of genome quality, complexity, sequence read input, and method on protein-coding gene predictions.

Methods

The impact of repeat masking, long-read and short-read inputs, and de novo and genome-guided protein evidence was examined in the context of the popular BRAKER and MAKER workflows for five plant genomes. The annotations were benchmarked for structural traits and sequence similarity.

Results

Benchmarks that reflect gene structures, reciprocal similarity search alignments, and mono-exonic/multi-exonic gene counts provide a more complete view of annotation accuracy. Transcripts derived from RNA-read alignments alone are not sufficient for genome annotation. Gene prediction workflows that combine evidence-based and ab initio approaches are recommended, and a combination of short and long reads can improve genome annotation. Adding protein evidence from de novo assemblies, genome-guided transcriptome assemblies, or full-length proteins from OrthoDB generates more putative false positives as implemented in the current workflows. Post-processing with functional and structural filters is highly recommended.

Discussion

While the annotation of non-model plant genomes remains complex, this study provides recommendations for inputs and methodological approaches. We discuss a set of best practices to generate an optimal plant genome annotation and present a more robust set of metrics to evaluate the resulting predictions.

Abstract Image

欢迎来到大叶子:改进非模式植物基因组注释的最佳实践
真核生物结构基因组注释缺乏可靠的标准来评估质量和完整性,因为基因组注释软件是使用模式生物开发的,通常缺乏基准来全面评估最终预测的质量和准确性。由于植物基因组的大尺寸、丰富的转座因子和多变的倍性,植物基因组的注释尤其具有挑战性。本研究探讨了基因组质量、复杂性、序列读取输入和方法对蛋白质编码基因预测的影响。方法在流行的BRAKER和MAKER工作流程中,研究了重复掩蔽、长读和短读输入、从头开始和基因组引导蛋白证据对五种植物基因组的影响。对注释的结构特征和序列相似性进行基准测试。结果反映基因结构、相互相似性搜索比对和单外显子/多外显子基因计数的基准提供了更完整的注释准确性视图。仅从rna读取序列中获得的转录本不足以用于基因组注释。推荐结合循证和从头算方法的基因预测工作流程,短读和长读的结合可以改善基因组注释。在当前的工作流程中,添加来自从头组装、基因组引导转录组组装或来自OrthoDB的全长蛋白质的蛋白质证据会产生更多的假阳性。强烈建议使用功能过滤器和结构过滤器进行后处理。虽然非模式植物基因组的注释仍然很复杂,但本研究为输入和方法方法提供了建议。我们讨论了一组最佳实践,以产生最佳的植物基因组注释,并提出了一组更稳健的指标来评估所产生的预测。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信