Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 889

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 21 of the 21 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mind the Gap: Upgrading Genomes with Pacific Biosciences RS Long-Read Sequencing Technology

Open access
English, Adam C., Richards, Stephen, Han, Yi, Wang, Min, Vee, Vanesa, Qu, Jiaxin, Qin, Xiang, Muzny, Donna M., Reid, Jeffrey G., Worley, Kim C., Gibbs, Richard A.·2012·PLoS ONE

Abstract

Many genomes have been sequenced to high-quality draft status using Sanger capillary electrophoresis and/or newer short-read sequence data and whole genome assembly techniques. However, even the best draft genomes contain gaps and other imperfections due to limitations in the input data and the techniques used to build draft assemblies. Sequencing biases, repetitive genomic features, genomic polymorphism, and other complicating factors all come together to make some regions difficult or impossible to assemble. Traditionally, draft genomes were upgraded to "phase 3 finished" status using time-consuming and expensive Sanger-based manual finishing processes. For more facile assembly and automated finishing of draft genomes, we present here an automated approach to finishing using long-reads from the Pacific Biosciences RS (PacBio) platform. Our algorithm and associated software tool, PBJelly, (publicly available at https://sourceforge.net/projects/pb-jelly/) automates the finishing process using long sequence reads in a reference-guided assembly process. PBJelly also provides "lift-over" co-ordinate tables to easily port existing annotations to the upgraded assembly. Using PBJelly and long PacBio reads, we upgraded the draft genome sequences of a simulated Drosophila melanogaster, the version 2 draft Drosophila pseudoobscura, an assembly of the Assemblathon 2.0 budgerigar dataset, and a preliminary assembly of the Sooty mangabey. With 24× mapped coverage of PacBio long-reads, we addressed 99% of gaps and were able to close 69% and improve 12% of all gaps in D. pseudoobscura. With 4× mapped coverage of PacBio long-reads we saw reads address 63% of gaps in our budgerigar assembly, of which 32% were closed and 63% improved. With 6.8× mapped coverage of mangabey PacBio long-reads we addressed 97% of gaps and closed 66% of addressed gaps and improved 19%. The accuracy of gap closure was validated by comparison to Sanger sequencing on gaps from the original D. pseudoobscura draft assembly and shown to be dependent on initial reference quality.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0047768

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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.

Citations

Cites

Show all 21 references

Cited by

See all 889

Metadata

Authors
English, A. C., Richards, S., Han, Y., Wang, M., Vee, V., Qu, J., Qin, X., Muzny, D. M., Reid, J. G., Worley, K. C., & Gibbs, R. A.
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2012-11-21
Volume
7
Issue
11
Pages
e47768
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1974640383
Cited by
889
References
21
FWCI
13.13
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: Mind the Gap: Upgrading Genomes with Pacific Biosciences RS Long-Read Sequencing Technology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0047768
The paper
English, A. C., Richards, S., Han, Y., Wang, M., Vee, V., Qu, J., Qin, X., Muzny, D. M., Reid, J. G., Worley, K. C., & Gibbs, R. A. (2012). Mind the Gap: Upgrading Genomes with Pacific Biosciences RS Long-Read Sequencing Technology. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0047768

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.