Literature DB >> 30003143

Critical Assessment of Metagenome Interpretation Enters the Second Round.

Andreas Bremges1,2, Alice C McHardy1.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Year:  2018        PMID: 30003143      PMCID: PMC6040144          DOI: 10.1128/mSystems.00103-18

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  mSystems        ISSN: 2379-5077            Impact factor:   6.496


× No keyword cloud information.

EDITORIAL

Bioinformatic methods are key components in the analysis of large omics data sets now routinely generated in microbiome research. Methods are evaluated using a large variety of benchmark data sets and evaluation metrics in original research articles, and self-assessments may be biased, which complicates method comparisons from the literature (1). CAMI, the initiative for the Critical Assessment of Metagenome Interpretation, aims to develop community-wide standards and facilitates benchmarking by providing realistic standard data sets and organizing community challenges on a regular basis. It engages the microbiome research community in public workshops and hackathons to design future CAMI challenges and identify the most relevant evaluation metrics. The first CAMI challenge opened in 2015 and ran for 3 months. Developers could assess metagenome assembly, genome and taxonomic binning, as well as taxonomic profiling methods on metagenome benchmark data sets of different complexities, derived entirely from organisms not present in public genome databases (2). All data are available for further benchmarking (https://doi.org/10.5524/100344), together with open-source software to facilitate performing and reproducing evaluations (http://microbiome-cosi.org/cami/resources). Currently, CAMI is preparing for a second round of challenges, tentatively planned to open later this year. CAMI will provide data sets representing different environments and again offer assembly, taxonomic and genomic binning, as well as taxonomic profiling challenges (Fig. 1). Two multisample “toy” data sets representing microbial communities from different human body sites and from mouse gut are already provided to allow participants to prepare for the challenges (https://data.cami-challenge.org/participate). These practice data sets are generated from known genomes, and therefore reference-based methods (e.g., using genome databases for their analysis) might perform better here than for real shotgun metagenomic data, where a substantial portion of microbial community members have not been sequenced (3, 4). The second CAMI challenge data sets will therefore again include new genomes from taxa (at different evolutionary distances) not found in public databases. Furthermore, a new focus will be on establishing the value of long sequencing reads for microbiome research, with data sets providing both long- and short-read data. Lastly, a clinical pathogen discovery challenge will be offered, mimicking an emergency diagnostic situation in the clinic.
FIG 1 

CAMI will provide data sets representing different environments and again offer metagenome assembly, profiling, and binning challenges, as well as a new pathogen detection challenge, which mimics an emergency diagnostic situation in the clinic.

CAMI will provide data sets representing different environments and again offer metagenome assembly, profiling, and binning challenges, as well as a new pathogen detection challenge, which mimics an emergency diagnostic situation in the clinic. We invite everyone to join the CAMI effort and participate in the upcoming challenges!
  4 in total

1.  1,003 reference genomes of bacterial and archaeal isolates expand coverage of the tree of life.

Authors:  Supratim Mukherjee; Rekha Seshadri; Neha J Varghese; Emiley A Eloe-Fadrosh; Jan P Meier-Kolthoff; Markus Göker; R Cameron Coates; Michalis Hadjithomas; Georgios A Pavlopoulos; David Paez-Espino; Yasuo Yoshikuni; Axel Visel; William B Whitman; George M Garrity; Jonathan A Eisen; Philip Hugenholtz; Amrita Pati; Natalia N Ivanova; Tanja Woyke; Hans-Peter Klenk; Nikos C Kyrpides
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2017-06-12       Impact factor: 54.908

2.  A new view of the tree of life.

Authors:  Laura A Hug; Brett J Baker; Karthik Anantharaman; Christopher T Brown; Alexander J Probst; Cindy J Castelle; Cristina N Butterfield; Alex W Hernsdorf; Yuki Amano; Kotaro Ise; Yohey Suzuki; Natasha Dudek; David A Relman; Kari M Finstad; Ronald Amundson; Brian C Thomas; Jillian F Banfield
Journal:  Nat Microbiol       Date:  2016-04-11       Impact factor: 17.745

3.  Critical Assessment of Metagenome Interpretation-a benchmark of metagenomics software.

Authors:  Alexander Sczyrba; Peter Hofmann; Peter Belmann; David Koslicki; Stefan Janssen; Johannes Dröge; Ivan Gregor; Stephan Majda; Jessika Fiedler; Eik Dahms; Andreas Bremges; Adrian Fritz; Ruben Garrido-Oter; Tue Sparholt Jørgensen; Nicole Shapiro; Philip D Blood; Alexey Gurevich; Yang Bai; Dmitrij Turaev; Matthew Z DeMaere; Rayan Chikhi; Niranjan Nagarajan; Christopher Quince; Fernando Meyer; Monika Balvočiūtė; Lars Hestbjerg Hansen; Søren J Sørensen; Burton K H Chia; Bertrand Denis; Jeff L Froula; Zhong Wang; Robert Egan; Dongwan Don Kang; Jeffrey J Cook; Charles Deltel; Michael Beckstette; Claire Lemaitre; Pierre Peterlongo; Guillaume Rizk; Dominique Lavenier; Yu-Wei Wu; Steven W Singer; Chirag Jain; Marc Strous; Heiner Klingenberg; Peter Meinicke; Michael D Barton; Thomas Lingner; Hsin-Hung Lin; Yu-Chieh Liao; Genivaldo Gueiros Z Silva; Daniel A Cuevas; Robert A Edwards; Surya Saha; Vitor C Piro; Bernhard Y Renard; Mihai Pop; Hans-Peter Klenk; Markus Göker; Nikos C Kyrpides; Tanja Woyke; Julia A Vorholt; Paul Schulze-Lefert; Edward M Rubin; Aaron E Darling; Thomas Rattei; Alice C McHardy
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2017-10-02       Impact factor: 28.547

4.  The self-assessment trap: can we all be better than average?

Authors:  Raquel Norel; John Jeremy Rice; Gustavo Stolovitzky
Journal:  Mol Syst Biol       Date:  2011-10-11       Impact factor: 11.429

  4 in total
  7 in total

1.  Critical Assessment of Metagenome Interpretation: the second round of challenges.

Authors:  Fernando Meyer; Adrian Fritz; Zhi-Luo Deng; David Koslicki; Till Robin Lesker; Alexey Gurevich; Gary Robertson; Mohammed Alser; Dmitry Antipov; Francesco Beghini; Denis Bertrand; Jaqueline J Brito; C Titus Brown; Jan Buchmann; Aydin Buluç; Bo Chen; Rayan Chikhi; Philip T L C Clausen; Alexandru Cristian; Piotr Wojciech Dabrowski; Aaron E Darling; Rob Egan; Eleazar Eskin; Evangelos Georganas; Eugene Goltsman; Melissa A Gray; Lars Hestbjerg Hansen; Steven Hofmeyr; Pingqin Huang; Luiz Irber; Huijue Jia; Tue Sparholt Jørgensen; Silas D Kieser; Terje Klemetsen; Axel Kola; Mikhail Kolmogorov; Anton Korobeynikov; Jason Kwan; Nathan LaPierre; Claire Lemaitre; Chenhao Li; Antoine Limasset; Fabio Malcher-Miranda; Serghei Mangul; Vanessa R Marcelino; Camille Marchet; Pierre Marijon; Dmitry Meleshko; Daniel R Mende; Alessio Milanese; Niranjan Nagarajan; Jakob Nissen; Sergey Nurk; Leonid Oliker; Lucas Paoli; Pierre Peterlongo; Vitor C Piro; Jacob S Porter; Simon Rasmussen; Evan R Rees; Knut Reinert; Bernhard Renard; Espen Mikal Robertsen; Gail L Rosen; Hans-Joachim Ruscheweyh; Varuni Sarwal; Nicola Segata; Enrico Seiler; Lizhen Shi; Fengzhu Sun; Shinichi Sunagawa; Søren Johannes Sørensen; Ashleigh Thomas; Chengxuan Tong; Mirko Trajkovski; Julien Tremblay; Gherman Uritskiy; Riccardo Vicedomini; Zhengyang Wang; Ziye Wang; Zhong Wang; Andrew Warren; Nils Peder Willassen; Katherine Yelick; Ronghui You; Georg Zeller; Zhengqiao Zhao; Shanfeng Zhu; Jie Zhu; Ruben Garrido-Oter; Petra Gastmeier; Stephane Hacquard; Susanne Häußler; Ariane Khaledi; Friederike Maechler; Fantin Mesny; Simona Radutoiu; Paul Schulze-Lefert; Nathiana Smit; Till Strowig; Andreas Bremges; Alexander Sczyrba; Alice Carolyn McHardy
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2022-04-08       Impact factor: 28.547

Review 2.  Sequencing-based methods and resources to study antimicrobial resistance.

Authors:  Manish Boolchandani; Alaric W D'Souza; Gautam Dantas
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 53.242

3.  Current progress and future opportunities in applications of bioinformatics for biodefense and pathogen detection: report from the Winter Mid-Atlantic Microbiome Meet-up, College Park, MD, January 10, 2018.

Authors:  Jacquelyn S Meisel; Daniel J Nasko; Brian Brubach; Victoria Cepeda-Espinoza; Jessica Chopyk; Héctor Corrada-Bravo; Marcus Fedarko; Jay Ghurye; Kiran Javkar; Nathan D Olson; Nidhi Shah; Sarah M Allard; Adam L Bazinet; Nicholas H Bergman; Alexis Brown; J Gregory Caporaso; Sean Conlan; Jocelyne DiRuggiero; Samuel P Forry; Nur A Hasan; Jason Kralj; Paul M Luethy; Donald K Milton; Brian D Ondov; Sarah Preheim; Shashikala Ratnayake; Stephanie M Rogers; M J Rosovitz; Eric G Sakowski; Nils Oliver Schliebs; Daniel D Sommer; Krista L Ternus; Gherman Uritskiy; Sean X Zhang; Mihai Pop; Todd J Treangen
Journal:  Microbiome       Date:  2018-11-05       Impact factor: 14.650

4.  CAMISIM: simulating metagenomes and microbial communities.

Authors:  Adrian Fritz; Peter Hofmann; Stephan Majda; Eik Dahms; Johannes Dröge; Jessika Fiedler; Till R Lesker; Peter Belmann; Matthew Z DeMaere; Aaron E Darling; Alexander Sczyrba; Andreas Bremges; Alice C McHardy
Journal:  Microbiome       Date:  2019-02-08       Impact factor: 14.650

Review 5.  Bioinformatics for Marine Products: An Overview of Resources, Bottlenecks, and Perspectives.

Authors:  Luca Ambrosino; Michael Tangherlini; Chiara Colantuono; Alfonso Esposito; Mara Sangiovanni; Marco Miralto; Clementina Sansone; Maria Luisa Chiusano
Journal:  Mar Drugs       Date:  2019-10-11       Impact factor: 5.118

6.  LEMMI: a continuous benchmarking platform for metagenomics classifiers.

Authors:  Mathieu Seppey; Mosè Manni; Evgeny M Zdobnov
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2020-07-02       Impact factor: 9.043

7.  CAMITAX: Taxon labels for microbial genomes.

Authors:  Andreas Bremges; Adrian Fritz; Alice C McHardy
Journal:  Gigascience       Date:  2020-01-01       Impact factor: 6.524

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.