↓ Skip to main content

ccTSA: A Coverage-Centric Threaded Sequence Assembler

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
ccTSA: A Coverage-Centric Threaded Sequence Assembler
Published in
PLOS ONE, June 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0039232
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jung Ho Ahn

Abstract

De novo sequencing, a process to find the whole genome or the regions of a species without references, requires much higher computational power compared to mapped sequencing with references. The advent and continuous evolution of next-generation sequencing technologies further stress the demands of high-throughput processing of myriads of short DNA fragments. Recently announced sequence assemblers, such as Velvet, SOAPdenovo, and ABySS, all exploit parallelism to meet these computational demands since contemporary computer systems primarily rely on scaling the number of computing cores to improve performance. However, most of them are not tailored to exploit the full potential of these systems, leading to suboptimal performance. In this paper, we present ccTSA, a parallel sequence assembler that utilizes coverage to prune k-mers, find preferred edges, and resolve conflicts in preferred edges between k-mers. We minimize computation dependencies between threads to effectively parallelize k-mer processing. We also judiciously allocate and reuse memory space in order to lower memory usage and further improve sequencing speed. The results of ccTSA are compelling such that it runs several times faster than other assemblers while providing comparable quality values such as N50.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 11%
Hungary 1 4%
Norway 1 4%
United Kingdom 1 4%
Korea, Republic of 1 4%
Spain 1 4%
China 1 4%
Unknown 19 68%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 50%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 25%
Professor 2 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 7%
Student > Master 2 7%
Other 1 4%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 46%
Computer Science 7 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 11%
Engineering 2 7%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 2 7%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 05 July 2012.
All research outputs
#5,848,216
of 22,668,244 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#69,996
of 193,511 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,706
of 164,469 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,131
of 3,922 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,668,244 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,511 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 164,469 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,922 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.