The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A phylogeny-driven genomic encyclopaedia of Bacteria and Archaea
Open accessAbstract
The bacterial and archaeal genomes that have been sequenced to date were chosen for sequencing based mainly on their physiology, which is fine but has resulted in a distinct phylogenetic bias. An alternative approach has been taken in the Genomic Encyclopedia of Bacteria and Archaea (GEBA) project, which advocates choosing genomes based on the organism's phylogenetic position, with the aim filling in the gaps in sequencing along on bacterial and archaeal branches of the tree of life. The value of this approach has been demonstrated by a pilot study of the genome sequences of 56 culturable species selected to maximize phylogenetic coverage. Analysis of the sequences provides insights into phylogenetics, protein function and genome annotation. There are now nearly 1,000 completed bacterial and archaeal genomes available, but as most of them were chosen for sequencing on the basis of their physiology, the data are limited by a highly biased phylogenetic distribution. To explore the value added by choosing microbial genomes for sequencing on the basis of their evolutionary relationships, the genomes of 56 species of Bacteria and Archaea selected to maximize phylogenetic coverage are now sequenced and analysed. Sequencing of bacterial and archaeal genomes has revolutionized our understanding of the many roles played by microorganisms1. There are now nearly 1,000 completed bacterial and archaeal genomes available2, most of which were chosen for sequencing on the basis of their physiology. As a result, the perspective provided by the currently available genomes is limited by a highly biased phylogenetic distribution3,4,5. To explore the value added by choosing microbial genomes for sequencing on the basis of their evolutionary relationships, we have sequenced and analysed the genomes of 56 culturable species of Bacteria and Archaea selected to maximize phylogenetic coverage. Analysis of these genomes demonstrated pronounced benefits (compared to an equivalent set of genomes randomly selected from the existing database) in diverse areas including the reconstruction of phylogenetic history, the discovery of new protein families and biological properties, and the prediction of functions for known genes from other organisms. Our results strongly support the need for systematic ‘phylogenomic’ efforts to compile a phylogeny-driven ‘Genomic Encyclopedia of Bacteria and Archaea’ in order to derive maximum knowledge from existing microbial genome data as well as from genome sequences to come.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Greengenes, a Chimera-Checked 16S rRNA Gene Database and Workbench Compatible with ARB
DeSantis, T. Z., Hugenholtz, P., Larsen, N., Rojas, M., Brodie, E. L., Keller, K., Huber, T., Dalevi, D., Hu, P., & Andersen, G. L. (2006) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.03006-05 · Cited by 10,891
Self-citationDetecting Protein Function and Protein-Protein Interactions from Genome Sequences
Marcotte, E. M., Pellegrini, M., Ng, H.-L., Rice, D. W., Yeates, T. O., & Eisenberg, D. (1999) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.285.5428.751 · Cited by 1,670
Bacterial actins? An evolutionary perspective
Doolittle, R. F., & York, A. L. (2002) · BioEssays · doi:10.1002/bies.10079 · Cited by 33
Cited by
ModelFinder: fast model selection for accurate phylogenetic estimates
Kalyaanamoorthy, S., Minh, B. Q., Wong, T. K. F., von Haeseler, A., & Jermiin, L. S. (2017) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth.4285 · Cited by 18,449
Parks, D. H., Imelfort, M., Skennerton, C. T., Hugenholtz, P., & Tyson, G. W. (2015) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.186072.114 · Cited by 12,496
Self-citationHigh throughput ANI analysis of 90K prokaryotic genomes reveals clear species boundaries
Jain, C., Rodriguez-R, L. M., Phillippy, A. M., Konstantinidis, K. T., & Aluru, S. (2018) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-018-07641-9 · Cited by 5,748
The Genome Standards Consortium, Bowers, R. M., Kyrpides, N. C., Stepanauskas, R., Harmon-Smith, M., Doud, D., Reddy, T. B. K., Schulz, F., Jarett, J., Rivers, A. R., et al. (2017) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.3893 · Cited by 2,624
Self-citationInsights into the phylogeny and coding potential of microbial dark matter
Rinke, C., Schwientek, P., Sczyrba, A., Ivanova, N. N., Anderson, I. J., Cheng, J.-F., Darling, A., Malfatti, S., Swan, B. K., Gies, E. A., et al. (2013) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature12352 · Cited by 2,394
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Wu, D., Hugenholtz, P., Mavromatis, K., Pukall, R., Dalin, E., Ivanova, N. N., Kunin, V., Goodwin, L., Wu, M., Tindall, B. J., Hooper, S. D., Pati, A., Lykidis, A., Spring, S., Anderson, I. J., D’haeseleer, P., Zemla, A., Singer, M., Lapidus, A., Nolan, M., Copeland, A., Han, C., Chen, F., Cheng, J.-F., Lucas, S., Kerfeld, C., Lang, E., Gronow, S., Chain, P., Bruce, D., Rubin, E. M., Kyrpides, N. C., Klenk, H.-P., & Eisen, J. A.
- Venue
- Nature
- Published
- 2009-12
- Volume
- 462
- Issue
- 7276
- Pages
- 1056-1060
- ISSN
- 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
- 1476-4687
- OpenAlex
- W2091232725
- Cited by
- 993
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 41.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A phylogeny-driven genomic encyclopaedia of Bacteria and Archaea. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/nature08656
- The paper
- Wu, D., Hugenholtz, P., Mavromatis, K., Pukall, R., Dalin, E., Ivanova, N. N., Kunin, V., Goodwin, L., Wu, M., Tindall, B. J., Hooper, S. D., Pati, A., Lykidis, A., Spring, S., Anderson, I. J., D’haeseleer, P., Zemla, A., Singer, M., Lapidus, A., . . . Eisen, J. A. (2009). A phylogeny-driven genomic encyclopaedia of Bacteria and Archaea. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08656
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.