2021
DOI: 10.3897/biss.5.74249
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Third-party Annotations: Linking PlutoF platform and the ELIXIR Contextual Data ClearingHouse for the reporting of source material annotation gaps and inaccuracies

Abstract: Third-party annotations are a valuable resource to improve the quality of public DNA sequences. For example, sequences in International Nucleotide Sequence Databases Collaboration (INSDC) often lack important features like taxon interactions, species level identification, information associated with habitat, locality, country, coordinates, etc. Therefore, initiatives to mine additional information from publications and link to the public DNA sequences have become common practice (e.g. Tedersoo et al. 2011, Nil… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
46
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 57 publications
(60 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
46
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Taxonomic assignment was performed with the naive Bayes feature‐classifier (Bokulich et al, 2018). The taxonomic assignment was performed with the Silva 138 SSURef NR99 database for prokaryotes (Robeson et al, 2021) and UNITE (version 8.3) for fungi (Abarenkov et al, 2020; Nilsson et al, 2019). ASVs with taxonomic assignments to mitochondria, chloroplast, and eukaryote 18 S sequences were filtered from the prokaryote dataset, and non‐fungal eukaryotes were excluded from the ITS2 dataset.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Taxonomic assignment was performed with the naive Bayes feature‐classifier (Bokulich et al, 2018). The taxonomic assignment was performed with the Silva 138 SSURef NR99 database for prokaryotes (Robeson et al, 2021) and UNITE (version 8.3) for fungi (Abarenkov et al, 2020; Nilsson et al, 2019). ASVs with taxonomic assignments to mitochondria, chloroplast, and eukaryote 18 S sequences were filtered from the prokaryote dataset, and non‐fungal eukaryotes were excluded from the ITS2 dataset.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Because of the mixed orientation, we checked for reverse complement reads with DADA2s rc() function (Callahan et al, 2016) and added them to the original ASV table. In a last step, the three replicates were merged into a single table, which was matched against the UNITE database (version 9.0, including eukaryotic ITSs as outgroups; Abarenkov et al, 2022) by the DADA2 assignTaxonomy() function (Callahan et al, 2016) with minBoot = 50 and tryRC = TRUE. The ASV table was checked for potential contaminants with the decontam algorithm (Davis et al, 2018), set to both prevalence and frequency, and further curated using the LULU algorithm (Frøslev et al, 2017) with default parameters, grouping ASVs through patterns of similarity and sequence co-occurrence.…”
Section: Study Regionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The taxonomy of the OTUs was created using VSEARCH. The SILVA and Unite databases were used to determine the taxonomy of bacterial and fungal OTUs, respectively [60,61]. Non-bacterial or non-fungal sequences were removed using the amplicon package within R [49].…”
Section: Microbiota Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%