Chapter title |
Sequencing, Assembling, and Finishing Complete Bacteriophage Genomes
|
---|---|
Chapter number | 9 |
Book title |
Bacteriophages
|
Published in |
Methods in molecular biology, January 2018
|
DOI | 10.1007/978-1-4939-7343-9_9 |
Pubmed ID | |
Book ISBNs |
978-1-4939-7341-5, 978-1-4939-7343-9
|
Authors |
Daniel A. Russell, Russell, Daniel A. |
Abstract |
Next-generation DNA sequencing (NGS) technologies have made generating genomic sequence for organisms of interest affordable and commonplace. However, NGS platforms and analysis software are generally tuned to be used on large and complex genomes or metagenomic samples. Determining the complete genome sequence of a single bacteriophage requires a somewhat different perspective, workflow, and sensitivity to the nature of phages. Because phage genomes consist of mostly coding regions (see Pope/Jacobs-Sera chapter), a very high standard should be adopted when completing these genomes so that the subsequent steps of annotation and analysis are not sabotaged by sequencing errors. While read quality and assembly algorithms have continued to improve, achieving this standard still requires a significant amount of human oversight and expertise. This chapter describes our workflow for sequencing, assembling, and finishing phage genomes to a high standard by the NGS platforms Illumina, Ion Torrent, and 454. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 6 | 40% |
Sweden | 1 | 7% |
France | 1 | 7% |
India | 1 | 7% |
Unknown | 6 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 9 | 60% |
Scientists | 6 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 72 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 18% |
Researcher | 11 | 15% |
Student > Master | 7 | 10% |
Student > Bachelor | 6 | 8% |
Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 6% |
Other | 14 | 19% |
Unknown | 17 | 24% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 23 | 32% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 15 | 21% |
Immunology and Microbiology | 6 | 8% |
Engineering | 4 | 6% |
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 1% |
Other | 2 | 3% |
Unknown | 21 | 29% |