Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,150

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparison of Sequencing Utility Programs

Open access
Aronesty, Erik·2013·The Open Bioinformatics Journal

Abstract

High throughput sequencing (HTS) has resulted in extreme growth rates of sequencing data. At our lab, we generate terabytes of data every day. It is usually seen as required for data output to be “cleaned” and processed in various ways prior to use for common tasks such as variant calling, expression quantification and assembly. Two common tasks associated with HTS are adapter trimming and paired-end joining. I have developed two tools at Expression Analysis, Inc. to address these common tasks. The names of these programs are fastq-mcf and fastq-join. I compared the performance of these tools to similar open-source utilities, both in terms of resource efficiency, and effectiveness.

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 · 10.2174/1875036201307010001

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Cited by

See all 1,150

Metadata

Authors
Aronesty, E.
Venue
The Open Bioinformatics Journal
Published
2013-01-31
Volume
7
Issue
1
Pages
1-8
ISSN
1875-0362 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2094100452
Cited by
1,150
References
2
FWCI
19.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
diamond

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: Comparison of Sequencing Utility Programs. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2174/1875036201307010001
The paper
Aronesty, E. (2013). Comparison of Sequencing Utility Programs. The Open Bioinformatics Journal. https://doi.org/10.2174/1875036201307010001

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.