The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
NCBI prokaryotic genome annotation pipeline
Open accessAbstract
Recent technological advances have opened unprecedented opportunities for large-scale sequencing and analysis of populations of pathogenic species in disease outbreaks, as well as for large-scale diversity studies aimed at expanding our knowledge across the whole domain of prokaryotes. To meet the challenge of timely interpretation of structure, function and meaning of this vast genetic information, a comprehensive approach to automatic genome annotation is critically needed. In collaboration with Georgia Tech, NCBI has developed a new approach to genome annotation that combines alignment based methods with methods of predicting protein-coding and RNA genes and other functional elements directly from sequence. A new gene finding tool, GeneMarkS+, uses the combined evidence of protein and RNA placement by homology as an initial map of annotation to generate and modify ab initio gene predictions across the whole genome. Thus, the new NCBI's Prokaryotic Genome Annotation Pipeline (PGAP) relies more on sequence similarity when confident comparative data are available, while it relies more on statistical predictions in the absence of external evidence. The pipeline provides a framework for generation and analysis of annotation on the full breadth of prokaryotic taxonomy. For additional information on PGAP see https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genome/annotation_prok/ and the NCBI Handbook, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK174280/.
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
BLAST+: architecture and applications
Camacho, C., Coulouris, G., Avagyan, V., Ma, N., Papadopoulos, J., Bealer, K., & Madden, T. L. (2009) · BMC Bioinformatics · doi:10.1186/1471-2105-10-421 · Cited by 22,074
Toward Automatic Reconstruction of a Highly Resolved Tree of Life
Ciccarelli, F. D., Doerks, T., von Mering, C., Creevey, C. J., Snel, B., & Bork, P. (2006) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1123061 · Cited by 1,663
A large-scale evaluation of computational protein function prediction
Radivojac, P., Clark, W. T., Oron, T. R., Schnoes, A. M., Wittkop, T., Sokolov, A., Graim, K., Funk, C., Verspoor, K., Ben-Hur, A., et al. (2013) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth.2340 · Cited by 1,028
Cited by
tRNAscan-SE 2.0: improved detection and functional classification of transfer RNA genes
Chan, P. P., Lin, B. Y., Mak, A. J., & Lowe, T. M. (2021) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkab688 · Cited by 1,925
Pérez-Cobas, A. E., Gomez-Valero, L., & Buchrieser, C. (2020) · Microbial Genomics · doi:10.1099/mgen.0.000409 · Cited by 314
Exploring bacterial diversity via a curated and searchable snapshot of archived DNA sequences
Blackwell, G. A., Hunt, M., Malone, K. M., Lima, L., Horesh, G., Alako, B. T. F., Thomson, N. R., & Iqbal, Z. (2021) · PLOS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3001421 · Cited by 111
Schmid, M., Frei, D., Patrignani, A., Schlapbach, R., Frey, J. E., Remus-Emsermann, M. N. P., & Ahrens, C. H. (2018) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gky726 · Cited by 92
Escherichia coli Small Proteome
Hemm, M. R., Weaver, J., & Storz, G. (2020) · EcoSal Plus · doi:10.1128/ecosalplus.esp-0031-2019 · Cited by 91
Metadata
- Authors
- Tatusova, T., DiCuccio, M., Badretdin, A., Chetvernin, V., Nawrocki, E. P., Zaslavsky, L., Lomsadze, A., Pruitt, K. D., Borodovsky, M., & Ostell, J.
- Venue
- Nucleic Acids Research
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2016-06-24
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 14
- Pages
- 6614-6624
- ISSN
- 0305-1048 (ISSN-L)
- 1362-4962
- OpenAlex
- W2470052926
- Cited by
- 7,014
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 154.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: NCBI prokaryotic genome annotation pipeline. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/nar/gkw569
- The paper
- Tatusova, T., DiCuccio, M., Badretdin, A., Chetvernin, V., Nawrocki, E. P., Zaslavsky, L., Lomsadze, A., Pruitt, K. D., Borodovsky, M., & Ostell, J. (2016). NCBI prokaryotic genome annotation pipeline. Nucleic Acids Research. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkw569
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.