Cited by 876Genomics and Phylogenetic StudiesAlgorithms and Data CompressionFractal and DNA sequence analysis

A survey of sequence alignment algorithms for next-generation sequencing

Open access
Li, H., Homer, N.·2010·Briefings in Bioinformatics

Abstract

Rapidly evolving sequencing technologies produce data on an unparalleled scale. A central challenge to the analysis of this data is sequence alignment, whereby sequence reads must be compared to a reference. A wide variety of alignment algorithms and software have been subsequently developed over the past two years. In this article, we will systematically review the current development of these algorithms and introduce their practical applications on different types of experimental data. We come to the conclusion that short-read alignment is no longer the bottleneck of data analyses. We also consider future development of alignment algorithms with respect to emerging long sequence reads and the prospect of cloud computing.

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 · 10.1093/bib/bbq015

Cites

73 of 73 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • High inter-site false positive DEG rates were observed across multiple analysis pipelines (WHAM, Mapsplice, Novoalign, Cufflinks, HTSeq), independent of pipeline or alignment method.

    “When we examined the inter-site DEG false positive rates for several other analysis pipelines (WHAM34, Mapsplice35, Novoalign36, Cufflinks23, 37, 38 and HTSeq39) we found similarly high false positive rates, regardless of the analysis pipeline or read alignment methods used (Supplementary Fig. 1).”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 74 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Li, H., & Homer, N.
Affiliations
Broad Institute (US)
ORCID
Li, H.
Venue
Briefings in Bioinformatics
Published
2010-05-11
Volume
11
Issue
5
Pages
473-483
ISSN
  • 1467-5463 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-4054
OpenAlex
W2093931624
Cited by
875
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 41 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 69 · 2017: 52 · 2016: 74 · 2015: 88 · 2014: 118 · 2013: 105 · 2012: 83
FWCI
7.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Briefings in Bioinformatics (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (U01HG005210, U01HG005208)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Algorithms and Data Compression
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Fractal and DNA sequence analysis
Keywords
sequence alignment, next-generation sequencing, short-read alignment, long-read sequencing, alignment algorithms, reference genome mapping, cloud computing, bioinformatics software
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Base Sequence, Humans, Software, Genome, Human, Sequence Alignment, Sequence Analysis, DNA

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