143 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38058765)
1. Comparison of k-mer-based
Ponsero AJ; Miller M; Hurwitz BL
Microbiome Res Rep; 2023; 2(4):27. PubMed ID: 38058765
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Assessment of k-mer spectrum applicability for metagenomic dissimilarity analysis.
Dubinkina VB; Ischenko DS; Ulyantsev VI; Tyakht AV; Alexeev DG
BMC Bioinformatics; 2016 Jan; 17():38. PubMed ID: 26774270
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Libra: scalable k-mer-based tool for massive all-vs-all metagenome comparisons.
Choi I; Ponsero AJ; Bomhoff M; Youens-Clark K; Hartman JH; Hurwitz BL
Gigascience; 2019 Feb; 8(2):. PubMed ID: 30597002
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Quality control of microbiota metagenomics by k-mer analysis.
Plaza Onate F; Batto JM; Juste C; Fadlallah J; Fougeroux C; Gouas D; Pons N; Kennedy S; Levenez F; Dore J; Ehrlich SD; Gorochov G; Larsen M
BMC Genomics; 2015 Mar; 16(1):183. PubMed ID: 25887914
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. MinION™ nanopore sequencing of environmental metagenomes: a synthetic approach.
Brown BL; Watson M; Minot SS; Rivera MC; Franklin RB
Gigascience; 2017 Mar; 6(3):1-10. PubMed ID: 28327976
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of different assembly and annotation tools on analysis of simulated viral metagenomic communities in the gut.
Vázquez-Castellanos JF; García-López R; Pérez-Brocal V; Pignatelli M; Moya A
BMC Genomics; 2014 Jan; 15():37. PubMed ID: 24438450
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A convenient correspondence between k-mer-based metagenomic distances and phylogenetically-informed β-diversity measures.
Zhai H; Fukuyama J
PLoS Comput Biol; 2023 Jan; 19(1):e1010821. PubMed ID: 36608056
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. From defaults to databases: parameter and database choice dramatically impact the performance of metagenomic taxonomic classification tools.
Wright RJ; Comeau AM; Langille MGI
Microb Genom; 2023 Mar; 9(3):. PubMed ID: 36867161
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Investigation of machine learning algorithms for taxonomic classification of marine metagenomes.
Park H; Lim SJ; Cosme J; O'Connell K; Sandeep J; Gayanilo F; Cutter GR; Montes E; Nitikitpaiboon C; Fisher S; Moustahfid H; Thompson LR
Microbiol Spectr; 2023 Sep; 11(5):e0523722. PubMed ID: 37695074
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Assessment of metagenomic assemblers based on hybrid reads of real and simulated metagenomic sequences.
Wang Z; Wang Y; Fuhrman JA; Sun F; Zhu S
Brief Bioinform; 2020 May; 21(3):777-790. PubMed ID: 30860572
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Lerna: transformer architectures for configuring error correction tools for short- and long-read genome sequencing.
Sharma A; Jain P; Mahgoub A; Zhou Z; Mahadik K; Chaterji S
BMC Bioinformatics; 2022 Jan; 23(1):25. PubMed ID: 34991450
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Assessing the performance of different approaches for functional and taxonomic annotation of metagenomes.
Tamames J; Cobo-Simón M; Puente-Sánchez F
BMC Genomics; 2019 Dec; 20(1):960. PubMed ID: 31823721
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A concurrent subtractive assembly approach for identification of disease associated sub-metagenomes.
Han W; Wang M; Ye Y
Res Comput Mol Biol; 2017; 2017():18-33. PubMed ID: 29177251
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. MetaFast: fast reference-free graph-based comparison of shotgun metagenomic data.
Ulyantsev VI; Kazakov SV; Dubinkina VB; Tyakht AV; Alexeev DG
Bioinformatics; 2016 Sep; 32(18):2760-7. PubMed ID: 27259541
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. MetaCRAST: reference-guided extraction of CRISPR spacers from unassembled metagenomes.
Moller AG; Liang C
PeerJ; 2017; 5():e3788. PubMed ID: 28894651
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Evaluating
Vosloo S; Huo L; Anderson CL; Dai Z; Sevillano M; Pinto A
Microbiol Spectr; 2021 Dec; 9(3):e0143421. PubMed ID: 34730411
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Identifying
Wang Y; Fu L; Ren J; Yu Z; Chen T; Sun F
Front Microbiol; 2018; 9():872. PubMed ID: 29774017
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. LMAS: evaluating metagenomic short de novo assembly methods through defined communities.
Mendes CI; Vila-Cerqueira P; Motro Y; Moran-Gilad J; Carriço JA; Ramirez M
Gigascience; 2022 Dec; 12():. PubMed ID: 36576131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Subtractive assembly for comparative metagenomics, and its application to type 2 diabetes metagenomes.
Wang M; Doak TG; Ye Y
Genome Biol; 2015 Nov; 16():243. PubMed ID: 26527161
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison of De Novo Transcriptome Assemblers and k-mer Strategies Using the Killifish, Fundulus heteroclitus.
Rana SB; Zadlock FJ; Zhang Z; Murphy WR; Bentivegna CS
PLoS One; 2016; 11(4):e0153104. PubMed ID: 27054874
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
