↓ Skip to main content

A manually annotated Actinidia chinensis var. chinensis (kiwifruit) genome highlights the challenges associated with draft genomes and gene prediction in plants

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
82 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A manually annotated Actinidia chinensis var. chinensis (kiwifruit) genome highlights the challenges associated with draft genomes and gene prediction in plants
Published in
BMC Genomics, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12864-018-4656-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarah M. Pilkington, Ross Crowhurst, Elena Hilario, Simona Nardozza, Lena Fraser, Yongyan Peng, Kularajathevan Gunaseelan, Robert Simpson, Jibran Tahir, Simon C. Deroles, Kerry Templeton, Zhiwei Luo, Marcus Davy, Canhong Cheng, Mark McNeilage, Davide Scaglione, Yifei Liu, Qiong Zhang, Paul Datson, Nihal De Silva, Susan E. Gardiner, Heather Bassett, David Chagné, John McCallum, Helge Dzierzon, Cecilia Deng, Yen-Yi Wang, Lorna Barron, Kelvina Manako, Judith Bowen, Toshi M. Foster, Zoe A. Erridge, Heather Tiffin, Chethi N. Waite, Kevin M. Davies, Ella P. Grierson, William A. Laing, Rebecca Kirk, Xiuyin Chen, Marion Wood, Mirco Montefiori, David A. Brummell, Kathy E. Schwinn, Andrew Catanach, Christina Fullerton, Dawei Li, Sathiyamoorthy Meiyalaghan, Niels Nieuwenhuizen, Nicola Read, Roneel Prakash, Don Hunter, Huaibi Zhang, Marian McKenzie, Mareike Knäbel, Alastair Harris, Andrew C. Allan, Andrew Gleave, Angela Chen, Bart J. Janssen, Blue Plunkett, Charles Ampomah-Dwamena, Charlotte Voogd, Davin Leif, Declan Lafferty, Edwige J. F. Souleyre, Erika Varkonyi-Gasic, Francesco Gambi, Jenny Hanley, Jia-Long Yao, Joey Cheung, Karine M. David, Ben Warren, Ken Marsh, Kimberley C. Snowden, Kui Lin-Wang, Lara Brian, Marcela Martinez-Sanchez, Mindy Wang, Nadeesha Ileperuma, Nikolai Macnee, Robert Campin, Peter McAtee, Revel S. M. Drummond, Richard V. Espley, Hilary S. Ireland, Rongmei Wu, Ross G. Atkinson, Sakuntala Karunairetnam, Sean Bulley, Shayhan Chunkath, Zac Hanley, Roy Storey, Amali H. Thrimawithana, Susan Thomson, Charles David, Raffaele Testolin, Hongwen Huang, Roger P. Hellens, Robert J. Schaffer

Abstract

Most published genome sequences are drafts, and most are dominated by computational gene prediction. Draft genomes typically incorporate considerable sequence data that are not assigned to chromosomes, and predicted genes without quality confidence measures. The current Actinidia chinensis (kiwifruit) 'Hongyang' draft genome has 164 Mb of sequences unassigned to pseudo-chromosomes, and omissions have been identified in the gene models. A second genome of an A. chinensis (genotype Red5) was fully sequenced. This new sequence resulted in a 554.0 Mb assembly with all but 6 Mb assigned to pseudo-chromosomes. Pseudo-chromosomal comparisons showed a considerable number of translocation events have occurred following a whole genome duplication (WGD) event some consistent with centromeric Robertsonian-like translocations. RNA sequencing data from 12 tissues and ab initio analysis informed a genome-wide manual annotation, using the WebApollo tool. In total, 33,044 gene loci represented by 33,123 isoforms were identified, named and tagged for quality of evidential support. Of these 3114 (9.4%) were identical to a protein within 'Hongyang' The Kiwifruit Information Resource (KIR v2). Some proportion of the differences will be varietal polymorphisms. However, as most computationally predicted Red5 models required manual re-annotation this proportion is expected to be small. The quality of the new gene models was tested by fully sequencing 550 cloned 'Hort16A' cDNAs and comparing with the predicted protein models for Red5 and both the original 'Hongyang' assembly and the revised annotation from KIR v2. Only 48.9% and 63.5% of the cDNAs had a match with 90% identity or better to the original and revised 'Hongyang' annotation, respectively, compared with 90.9% to the Red5 models. Our study highlights the need to take a cautious approach to draft genomes and computationally predicted genes. Our use of the manual annotation tool WebApollo facilitated manual checking and correction of gene models enabling improvement of computational prediction. This utility was especially relevant for certain types of gene families such as the EXPANSIN like genes. Finally, this high quality gene set will supply the kiwifruit and general plant community with a new tool for genomics and other comparative analysis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 82 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 23 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 13%
Student > Master 9 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 2%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 22 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 37 45%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 17%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Unspecified 1 1%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 25 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 September 2021.
All research outputs
#4,486,312
of 24,701,594 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#1,721
of 11,048 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,901
of 301,626 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#48
of 234 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,701,594 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,048 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 301,626 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 234 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.