PreprintCited by 4,496Genomics and Phylogenetic StudiesMicrobial Community Ecology and PhysiologyEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies

metaSPAdes: a new versatile metagenomic assembler

Open access
Nurk, Sergey, Meleshko, Dmitry, Korobeynikov, Anton, Pevzner, Pavel A.·2017·Genome Research

Abstract

While metagenomics has emerged as a technology of choice for analyzing bacterial populations, the assembly of metagenomic data remains challenging, thus stifling biological discoveries. Moreover, recent studies revealed that complex bacterial populations may be composed from dozens of related strains, thus further amplifying the challenge of metagenomic assembly. metaSPAdes addresses various challenges of metagenomic assembly by capitalizing on computational ideas that proved to be useful in assemblies of single cells and highly polymorphic diploid genomes. We benchmark metaSPAdes against other state-of-the-art metagenome assemblers and demonstrate that it results in high-quality assemblies across diverse data sets.

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 · 10.1101/gr.213959.116

Cites

72 of 72 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?

  • metaSPAdes is MGnify's primary assembly algorithm because the ensuing assemblies are typically of better quality than those produced using other assemblers.

    “Assembly is a computationally expensive process, frequently requiring terabytes of memory to accomplish when using metaSPAdes (20), which is our primary assembly algorithm, as the ensuing assemblies are typically of better quality than those produced using other assemblers (21).”

    From MGnify: the microbiome analysis resource in 2020 (2019) · cites this paper as [20]

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nurk, S., Meleshko, D., Korobeynikov, A., & Pevzner, P. A.
Affiliations
St Petersburg University (RU)
Corresponding author
Nurk, Sergey
Venue
Genome Research
Published
2017-03-15
Volume
27
Issue
5
Pages
824-834
ISSN
  • 1088-9051 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-5469
OpenAlex
W2599417231
Cited by
4,496
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 540 · 2025: 691 · 2024: 714 · 2023: 596 · 2022: 629 · 2021: 514 · 2020: 401 · 2019: 218 · 2018: 131 · 2017: 58 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Genome Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
Russian Science Foundation (14-50-00069)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Microbial Community Ecology and Physiology
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Environmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
Keywords
metaSPAdes, metagenome assembly, bacterial populations, strain-level resolution, diploid genome assembly, assembler benchmarking
MeSH terms
Software, Genome, Bacterial, Sequence Analysis, DNA, Contig Mapping, Genomics, Metagenome

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