Cited by 34Genomics and Phylogenetic StudiesMachine Learning in BioinformaticsFractal and DNA sequence analysis

Highly accurate ab initio gene annotation with ANNEVO

Open access
Zhang, Pengyu, Xu, Tun, Wang, Songbo, Yang, Xiaofei, Sun, Peisen, Jia, Peng, Lin, Jiadong, Wang, Bo +5 more·2026·Nature Methods

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Accurate gene annotation is essential for deciphering the mapping from genomic sequences to their functional roles. However, current methods struggle to model complex gene transmission patterns, such as vertical inheritance and horizontal gene transfer. Here we introduce ANNEVO, a mixture of experts-based genomic language model that directly models distal sequence dependencies and joint evolutionary relationships from diverse genomes, enabling precise ab initio gene annotation. Through extensive benchmarking on 566 phylogenetically diverse species, we demonstrate that ANNEVO substantially outperforms existing ab initio methods and achieves performance comparable to state-of-the-art annotation pipelines. Furthermore, ANNEVO's independence from external evidence allows it to deliver more complete annotations than reference annotations for a broad range of species while correcting errors within them. These advancements will improve genome sequence interpretation and provide a framework capable of integrating evolutionary insights.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41592-026-03036-7

Cites

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 44 · Cited by 34

Authors
Zhang, P., Xu, T., Wang, S., Yang, X., Sun, P., Jia, P., Lin, J., Wang, B., Zhang, Y., Meng, D., Bush, S. J., Ning, Z., & Ye, K.
Affiliations
  • Xi'an Jiaotong University (CN)
  • Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University (CN)
  • First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University (CN)
  • Macau University of Science and Technology (MO)
  • Wellcome Sanger Institute (GB)
Corresponding author
Ye, Kai
Venue
Nature Methods
Published
2026-03-12
Volume
23
Issue
4
Pages
740-748
ISSN
  • 1548-7091 (ISSN-L)
  • 1548-7105
OpenAlex
W7135034101
Cited by
34
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 30 · 2025: 4
FWCI
62.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Methods (publishedVersion)
  • Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (32125009, 32430017, 323B2015, 32422019 and 62172325, 32400509, 62302386)
  • National Key R&D Program of China
  • Natural Science Foundation of Shaanxi Province (2024JC-JCQN-28)
  • Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Machine Learning in Bioinformatics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Fractal and DNA sequence analysis
Keywords
mixture of experts, genomic language models, horizontal gene transfer, vertical inheritance, phylogenetic relationships, deep learning for genomics
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Animals, Humans, Models, Genetic, Phylogeny, Software, Genome, Evolution, Molecular, Computational Biology, Genomics, Molecular Sequence Annotation

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