Literature DB >> 31316072

The genome assembly of asparagus bean, Vigna unguiculata ssp. sesquipedialis.

Qiuju Xia1,2,3, Lei Pan4, Ru Zhang5, Xuemei Ni2,3, Yangzi Wang2,3, Xiao Dong2,3, Yun Gao6, Zhe Zhang2,3, Ling Kui7, Yong Li2,3, Wen Wang5,7, Huanming Yang1,8, Chanyou Chen4, Jianhua Miao9, Wei Chen10,11,12, Yang Dong13,14,15.   

Abstract

Asparagus bean (Vigna. unguiculata ssp. sesquipedialis), known for its very long and tender green pods, is an important vegetable crop broadly grown in the developing Asian countries. In this study, we reported a 632.8 Mb assembly (549.81 Mb non-N size) of asparagus bean based on the whole genome shotgun sequencing strategy. We also generated a linkage map for asparagus bean, which helped anchor 94.42% of the scaffolds into 11 pseudo-chromosomes. A total of 42,609 protein-coding genes and 3,579 non-protein-coding genes were predicted from the assembly. Taken together, these genomic resources of asparagus bean will help develop a pan-genome of V. unguiculata and facilitate the investigation of economically valuable traits in this species, so that the cultivation of this plant would help combat the protein and energy malnutrition in the developing world.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31316072      PMCID: PMC6638192          DOI: 10.1038/s41597-019-0130-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Data        ISSN: 2052-4463            Impact factor:   6.444


Background & Summary

Asparagus bean (Vigna unguiculata ssp. sesquipedialis, 2n = 2× = 22) is a warm-season and drought-tolerant subspecies of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) with a wide cultivation area in East and Southeast Asia[1]. This plant is also known as yardlong bean because of its characteristic pod that grows up to 50–100 cm in length[2]. The long pod trait is believed to be the result of intensive local domestication after it was brought to Asia from sub-Saharan Africa[3]. Unlike the grain-type subspecies common cowpea (Vigna. unguiculata ssp. unguiculata, or black-eyed pea), asparagus bean is harvested while its pod is still tender, thereby providing a very good source of protein, minerals, vitamins, and dietary fiber[4]. Due to the low requirement for cultivation management and its high nutritional value, asparagus bean is one of the top crops that help combat malnutrition and food insecurity in most developing countries[5]. As the DNA sequencing technologies became more advanced and affordable for the past decade, previous research had mainly focused on delineating the genome of common cowpea (estimated genome size of 620 Mb[6]). The first study of cowpea genomics was reported in 2008, in which the gene-rich space of cowpea was sequenced and assembled into 52,149 assemblies (41,260 assemblies were annotated) and 70,679 singletons[7]. Then the common cowpea (variety IT97K-499-35) genomic resources including a partial 323 Mb whole-genome shotgun assembly[8], a 497 Mb bacterial artificial chromosome physical map[8], and consensus genetic maps based on either 10 K[9] or 50 K single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were available[8]. A more recent research reported two survey genomes of common cowpea (varieties IT97K-499-35 and IT86D-1010) with substantially improved assembly sizes (568 Mb and 609 Mb, respectively)[10]. In addition, a draft IT97K-499-35 variety reference genome was assembled by incorporating the single molecule real-time technology, yielding an assembly size of 519.4 Mb into 722 scaffolds and 11 pseudo-chromosomes[11]. Three genetic maps were derived from either simple sequence repeat markers[12,13] or restriction-site associated DNA sequencing for asparagus bean[14]. Most of these genetic resources are focus on the grain-type cowpea, but there are many differences between the two types of cowpea, such as morphology, growing environments and parts for use[12]. In this study, we aimed to fill the knowledge gap with regard to the asparagus bean genome and provide new genetic resources for breeding cowpea and related legume species. A schematic workflow of the research is shown in Fig. 1. In brief, a series of short-insert and large-insert Illumina libraries were sequenced on an Illumina HiSeq 4000 platform, yielding a total of 222.9 Gb clean data (Table 1). Since the genome size of asparagus bean was estimated to be about 590 Mb using the K-mer distribution analysis (Table 2) (Fig. 2), the clean data used for genome assembly represented about 340× coverage. The software SOAPdenovo[15] was used to generate a draft contig assembly of 549.8 Mb with a contig N50 size of 15.2 kb (Table 3). After scaffolding and gap closing, the final asparagus genome was 632.8 Mb (549.81 Mb non-N size) in size with scaffold N50 size of 2.7 Mb (Table 3). We also obtained 536,824 high-confident SNPs from the whole-genome sequencing data of 97 asparagus bean F2 individuals and two parents from a well-controlled selfing population. These SNPs were used to construct a high-density genetic map for asparagus bean, in which 1,556 scaffolds were successfully anchored onto 11 pseudo-chromosomes (Table 4). Furthermore, the asparagus bean genome contained 294.95 Mb of transposable elements, accounting for 46.47% of the assembly (Tables 5 and 6). The gene prediction was performed on a combination of de novo, homologous, and RNA-Seq-based approaches. It resulted in 42,609 protein-coding genes and 3,579 non-protein-coding genes, respectively (Table 7).
Fig. 1

General description of the assembly workflow. The pipeline included removal of low quality and adapter-contaminated reads, de novo assembly, construction of linkage map, chromosome-scale assembly, and genome annotation.

Table 1

Statistics of Raw Data after Filtering.

Insert SizeClean Length (bp)Number of Clean ReadsClean Bases (Gb)Sequence Coverae (X)
3502 × 125 #Hiseq 4000143,324,09535.83154.92
4452 × 125 #Hiseq 4000200,584,85050.14676.86
7582 × 125 #Hiseq 400060,211,85515.05323.07
9122 × 125 #Hiseq 4000113,659,70628.41543.55
20002 × 125 #Hiseq 400079,141,60219.78530.32
30002 × 125 #Hiseq 400082,610,56220.65331.65
50002 × 125 #Hiseq 400080,415,36220.10430.81
90002 × 125 #Hiseq 400072,037,22818.00927.6
150002 × 125 #Hiseq 400059,701,49514.92522.87
Total891,686,755222.921341.66
Table 2

Estimation of genome size and heterozygosity of asparagus bean by k-mer analysis.

kTotal number of k-mersMinimum coverage (X)Number of erroneous k-mersHomozygous peakEstimated genome size (Mb)Estimated heterozygosity (%)
1761,995,624,762362,614,930,973100593.810.81758
1961,069,619,958305,112,996,41193601.680.90512
2160,143,656,148286,464,570,68990596.430.89166
2359,217,725,396277,226,388,95989584.170.83246
2558,291,828,145267,766,008,14586587.510.76826
2757,365,972,074268,206,249,05384585.230.71033
2956,440,164,790248,580,620,67682583.650.66007
3155,514,382,010228,908,657,51779589.950.61617
Fig. 2

17-mer frequency distribution of sequencing reads.

Table 3

Results of the asparagus bean genome assembly.

ContigsScaffolds
Size (bp)NumberSize (bp)Number
N904,29336,621221,483308
N807,05326,804918,008183
N709,56620,1381,507,419130
N6012,22215,0592,195,35496
N5015,15411,0222,730,26470
Longest119,70114,145,393
Total Number (> = 500b)61,9629,083
Total Number (> = 1 kb)54,8645,621
Total549,819,68880,696632,812,75621,836
Table 4

Statistics of pseudo-chromosomes and genetic map in asparagus bean.

ChromosomesAnchored Scaffolds NumberTotal length (Mb)SNP Numberbin marker NumberGenetic distance (cM)Gene Bank accession
Vu0116252.0754,989159113.72CP039350
Vu028141.8841,888170125.31CP039348
Vu0316182.2558,426306398.24CP039346
Vu0423355.840,719175185.51CP039349
Vu058760.5831,84917183.74CP039354
Vu069745.3836,91615494.72CP039345
Vu078151.8123,748189207.05CP039353
Vu0814849.2244,186193333.04CP039351
Vu097953.9427,657179260.14CP039355
Vu1020349.6195,735155164.48CP039352
Vu1122454.9980,711162214.19CP039347
Total1556597.53536,82420132180.14
Table 5

Statistics of Repeats in the asparagus bean genome.

TypeRepeat Size (bp)% of genome
Trf67,718,07610.67
Repeatmasker41,222,4046.49
Proteinmask64,741,26510.2
De novo 264,487,55741.67
Total294,953,63846.47
Table 6

TEs Content in the assembled asparagus bean genome.

TypeRepbase TEsTE proteinsDe novoCombined TEs
Length (bp)% in genomeLength (bp)% in genomeLength (bp)% in genomeLength (bp)% in genome
DNA6,870,9141.08259,850,1121.551841,887,1956.599246,098,1437.2626
LINE698,3930.111,195,4660.18831,651,4470.26012,666,9680.4201
SINE30,8040.004862,4520.009874,7040.0117
LTR33,989,5145.354953,894,2248.4908112,113,18417.6631122,145,62519.2437
Other13,1180.00213,1180.002
Unknown119,021,28718.7515119,021,28718.7515
Total41,222,4046.49464,741,26510.1998261,567,31841.2092272,160,90642.8782
Table 7

Prediction of protein-coding genes in asparagus bean genome.

Gene setGene numberAve. gene lengthAve. CDS lengthTotal Exon numberAve. exon numberAve. exon lengthTotal intron number
HomologyAugustus45,8832,243.101,005.11207,6934.53222.0556,802,940
Arabidopsis26,8673,133.371,080.92124,3264.63233.5955,143,207
Pigeonpea44,0183,055.98996.71169,7073.86258.5290,644,666
Chickpea29,7223,267.601,101.41135,7274.57241.1964,383,299
Soybean35,3802,919.911,032.92152,2144.3240.0966,761,546
Lotus37,7132,436.51912.21142,6193.78241.2257,486,204
Medicago37,1642,785.79951.18148,4954238.0568,181,528
Rice25,9562,971.761,010.14112,8154.35232.4150,915,754
Common bean32,8603,059.371,099.25149,3634.55241.8464,409,431
Mungbean29,4683,695.351,123.44143,1844.86231.2175,789,153
Grape27,3583,732.391,059.30134,1634.9216.0173,130,296
Adzuki bean37,5963,191.78991.8160,4494.27232.482,710,459
DenovoGenscan40,7368,880.461,153.45230,0115.65204.28314,767,263
GlimmerHMM46,7551,867.51847.52164,6903.52240.6147,689,651
Transcriptome114,9478,244.23752.27243,1922.12355.57861,179,063
EVidenceModeler42,6093,156.051,043.18190,3044.47233.5790,027,213
General description of the assembly workflow. The pipeline included removal of low quality and adapter-contaminated reads, de novo assembly, construction of linkage map, chromosome-scale assembly, and genome annotation. Statistics of Raw Data after Filtering. Estimation of genome size and heterozygosity of asparagus bean by k-mer analysis. 17-mer frequency distribution of sequencing reads. Results of the asparagus bean genome assembly. Statistics of pseudo-chromosomes and genetic map in asparagus bean. Statistics of Repeats in the asparagus bean genome. TEs Content in the assembled asparagus bean genome. Prediction of protein-coding genes in asparagus bean genome.

Methods

Materials

All plant accessions were provided by Hubei Natural Science Resource Center for Edible Legumes in Wuhan of China. A single plant of the widely cultivated asparagus bean variety ‘Xiabao II’ (Vigna unguiculata ssp. sesquipedialis var. ‘Xiabao II’) was used for de novo sequencing and genome assembly. A F2 sequencing population was obtained for making the genetic map according to the following procedure. First, the F1 population were obtained by crossing ‘Xiabao II’ (male, same plant used for de novo sequencing) with a cultivar from the other subspecies, ‘Duanjiangdou’ (Vigna unguiculata ssp. unguiculata var. ‘Duanjiangdou’; female). This step yielded 17 seeds, from which only 12 seeds survived till flowering. These F1 individuals were bagged to promote selfing, which produced 561 seeds in total (the F2 generation). Only 367 of the F2 individuals were able to germinate and mature into full plants. We selected 97 of the 367 F2 individuals for genome sequencing and genetic map construction.

Whole-genome shotgun sequencing

Young leaves were collected from a single ‘Xiabao II’ plant and used for genomic DNA extraction by the CTAB method[16]. About 10 µg of genomic DNA were used for library construction. Four short-insert libraries (350 bp, 445 bp, 758 bp, and 912 bp) and five large-insert libraries (2 kb, 3 kb, 5 kb, 9 kb, and 15 kb) were constructed with NEBNext Ultra II DNA Kit (NEB, America) and Nextera Mate Pair Sample Preparation Kit (Illumina, America), respectively. These libraries were sequenced on an Illumina HiSeq 4000 platform. To ensure high-quality reads for the subsequent de novo assembly step, we filtered out the low-quality data by the following criteria: (a) reads with >2% unidentified nucleotides (N) or with poly-A structure; (b) reads with ≥40% bases having low quality for short insert-size libraries and ≥60% for large insert-size libraries; (c) reads with adapters or PCR duplication; (d) reads with 20 bp in 5′ terminal and 5 bp in 3′ terminal. Subsequently, about 222.9 Gb clean data were retrieved[17,18], covering 341.66-fold of the estimated genome (Table 1). The genomic DNA was extracted with the same procedure for the parents and all 97 F2 individuals in the resequencing population. Each DNA was used to construct 500 bp insert size libraries, which were then sequenced on an Illumina HiSeq 4000 platform. Each individual was sequenced to at least 4× coverage. NGSQCToolkit_v2.3.3[19] was used to filter low-quality reads (parameters: −l 70 −s 25) and trim the poor-quality terminal bases (parameters: −l 5 −r 5). A total of 882.67 Gb clean bases were kept, which represented 99% of the raw sequencing data[17,18].

Estimation of the genome size

The genome size of asparagus bean was estimated by the k-mer analysis approach using 69.42 Gb filtered short-insert sequencing data. The number of effective k-mers and the peak depth of a series of k values (17, 19, 21, 23, 25, 27 29 and 31) were generated by Jeffyfish (v2.2.6)[20] with the C-setting and the genome size was estimated to be about 590 Mb, according to the formula Genome_Size = (Total k-mers - Erroneous k-mers)/Peak_depth (Table 2). It is worth noting that this number could be an underestimate, in that the GC rich regions and repetitive sequences could not be properly resolved by k-mer analysis. Nonetheless, our estimated genome size was within the range of previously reported sizes (560.3 Mb11~620 Mb6). The rate of genome heterozygosity was calculated with the k-mer frequency distribution by the GenomeScope (v1.0.0)[21] and the result was around 0.77% (Fig. 2).

De novo genome assembly

Clean data from short insert-size libraries were corrected with the Error Correction program in SOAPdenovo package[15]. Genome assembly was performed based on the de Bruijn graph algorithm using SOAPdenovo package[22] by the following steps: (1) the paired-end reads of all libraries were used to construct the contig sequences while the K-mer values were set as 95 and 85 at the pregraph step and map step, respectively; (2) mapped paired reads were used to construct scaffolds; (3) The GapCloser package was used to map reads to the flanking sequences of gaps and to close gaps between the scaffolds; (4) genome sequence was randomly broken to re-scaffold with SSPACE package. Gaps were then filled again by GapCloser to obtain the final assembly. In the end, there were 54,864 out of 80,696 contigs with sizes longer than 1 kb. The total length of the contig assembly was 549.81 Mb (Table 3). The longest scaffold was 14,145,393 bp, and a total of 5,621 scaffolds were longer than 1,000 bp[17,23-25]. The total length of the scaffold assembly was 632.8 Mb (Table 3).

High-density genetic map construction and genome assembly anchoring

All clean data obtained from the two parents and the 97 F2 individuals were mapped to the asparagus bean scaffold assembly using the Burrows-Wheeler-Alignment tool (BWA)[26] mem algorithm. The SAM files were converted to BAM files using SAMtools[27]. Then the bam files were used to call SNP by the GATK software package[19] with parameters “-T HaplotypeCaller -stand_call_conf 30.0 -stand_emit_conf 10.0” and “-T SelectVariants -selectType SNP”. The SNPs were filtered using GATK with parameters as the following:–filterExpression “QD <2.0 || ReadPosRankSum <−8.0 || FS >60.0 || MQ <40.0 || SOR >3.0 || MQRankSum <−10.0 || QUAL <30” –logging_level ERROR–missingValuesInExpressionsShouldEvaluateAsFailing. After genotyping, the raw SNPs were filtered with the following criteria: missing rate <0.3 and heterozygous genotypes <0.5, resulting in a total of 836,933 high-confidence SNPs[23]. For the genetic map construction, 50 SNPs were selected to generate bin markers from the two termini and middle part of each scaffold. These bin markers were grouped into 11 linkage groups by JoinMap v4.1[28] with the regression mapping algorithm. The grouped bins were then sorted and genetic distance was calculated by MSTmap with the Kosambi model[29]. According to this linkage map, scaffolds were anchored onto 11 pseudo-chromosomes. The SNPs were then assigned chromosome positions and a sliding window method (window size of 50 SNPs; step size of one SNP) was adopted to identify recombination events for each individual. All the recombination sites were merged and sorted with 20 kb intervals[30]. In the end, the filtered 536,824 SNPs[23] were combined into 2,013 bins[23]. According to the distribution of bins, low-recombination regions were indicated (Fig. 3). These were used to construct 11 linkage maps, resulting in 2180.14 cM spanning the whole genome[23], which was within the reported genetic map size ranged from 643 cM[31] to 2,670 cM[32]. It is worth noting that the map lengths could be inflated by genotyping errors, as well as some biological phenomena causing double recombinations[33]. The sliding window method and bin markers were used to reduce genotype errors. Since the parents were not 100% homozygous, the F1 plants were not identical, which might result inflated genetic size. In addition, 1,556 scaffolds with 597.52 Mb were anchored[23], accounting for 94.42% of the assembled genome (Table 4).
Fig. 3

The distribution of bin markers. Black arrows indicated the low-recombination regions.

The distribution of bin markers. Black arrows indicated the low-recombination regions.

Transposable elements annotation

Transposable elements (TEs) annotation were performed by a combination of homology-based and de novo prediction approaches. Homology-based approach involved searching commonly used databases for known TEs at both DNA and protein level. With default parameters, RepeatMasker 3.3.0[34] was used to identify TEs against the Repbase TE library 18.07[35] and RepeatProteinMask[34] was used to identify TEs at the protein level in the genome assembly. For de novo prediction, RepeatModeler software (http://www.repeatmasker.org/) was used in constructing the de novo repeat library. Tandem repeats were then predicted by TRF[36] with parameters set to “Match = 2, Mismatch = 7, Delta = 7, PM = 80, PI = 10, Minscore = 50 and MaxPeriod = 2000”. In total, we identified 294.95 Mb of the transposable elements, accounting for 46.47% of the asparagus bean genome (Tables 5 and 6). Among all TEs, long terminal repeat (LTR), which are important determinants of angiosperm genome size variation, constituted 19.24% of the assembled genome. DNA TEs accounted for 7.2% of the total sequence.

Gene annotation

We used de novo, homology and RNA-Seq-based prediction methods to annotate protein-coding genes in the asparagus bean genome. Three de novo prediction programs, Augustus[37], Genscan[38] and GlimmerHMM[38] were used to annotate protein-coding genes while gene model parameters were trained from Arabidopsis thaliana. For homology-based prediction, protein sequences of all the protein-coding genes of eleven species including common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris), soybean (Glycine max), pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan), chickpea (Cicer arietinum), mungbean (Vigna radiata), adzuki bean (Vigna angularis), lotus (Lotus japonicus), medick (Medicago truncatula), Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana), grape (Vitis vinifera), and rice (Orzya sativa), were first mapped to the asparagus bean genome using TblastN with the parameter E-value = 10−5. GeneWise[39] was then used to predict gene structure within each protein-coding region. RNA-Seq data of root and stem tissues[40] were aligned to the asparagus bean genome using TopHat on default settings. Finally, the predicted genes were merged by EvidenceModeler (EVM)[41] to generate a consensus and non-redundant gene set. This process produced 42,609 protein-coding genes with an average length of 3,156 bp (Table 7). With BLASTP (E-value ≤ 10−5), gene functions were assigned according to the best hit of alignment to SwissProt[42], TrEMBL[43], and KEGG[44] database. Functional domains and motifs of asparagus bean genes were determined by InterProScan[45], which analyzed peptide sequences against protein databases including SMART, ProDom, Pfam, PRINTS, PROSITE and PANTHER. Gene Ontology (GO) terms for each gene were extracted from the corresponding InterPro entries. The result showed that 75.40% (32,126) of the total genes were supported by TrEMBL, 56.22% (23,953) by Swiss-Prot, and 59.27% (25,254) by InterPro. In addition, 10,096 (23.69%) genes could not be functionally annotated with current databases (Table 8).
Table 8

Functional annotation of predicted genes in asparagus bean genome.

NumberPercent (%)
Total42,609—–
InterPro25,25459.27
GO19,25445.19
KEGG18,37243.12
Swiss-Prot23,95356.22
TrEMBL32,12675.4
NR32,35675.94
Annotated32,51376.31
Functional annotation of predicted genes in asparagus bean genome. The tRNA genes were identified by tRNAscan-SE software[46] with default parameters. The rRNA genes were identified based on homology search to previously published plant rRNA sequences using BLASTN with parameters of “E-value = 10−5”. The snRNA and miRNA genes were identified by INFERNAL v1.0[47] software against the Rfam database with default parameters. In all, 3,579 non-protein-coding genes were identified in the asparagus bean genome, including 1593 tRNAs, 1,076 rRNAs, 350 snRNAs, and 210 microRNAs (Table 9).
Table 9

Annotation of non-coding RNA in asparagus bean genome.

TypeCopy(w)Average Length(bp)Total Length(bp)% of genome
miRNA210118.0571247920.003906
tRNA159375.102951196390.018849
rRNA538155.6636837470.013194
18S114346.0877394540.006216
rRNA28S77116.233889500.00141
5.8S22146.863632310.000509
5S32598.80615321120.005059
snRNA350120.44421540.006641
snRNACD-box179102.1285182810.00288
HACA-box24123.708329690.000468
splicing147142.2041209040.003293
Annotation of non-coding RNA in asparagus bean genome.

Data Records

The authors declare that all data reported here are fully and freely available from the date of publication. The data resulting from each experimental and analytic step are indicated in a table (Table 10). The assembly genome and annotation are available at CNSA[17], figshare[23], GenBank and have accessions CP039345[24] to CP039355[25]. Raw read files of genome sequencing are available at NCBI Sequence Read Archive[18] and CNSA[17]. The SNP sets of each pseudo chromosome, the anchored scaffolds information, the filtered SNPs set identified by GATK, the information of bin markers and the linkage map constructed by bin markers are deposited in figshare[23]. The RNA-seq data was deposited in figshare[40].
Table 10

Experimental study and data records.

SubjectsProtocol 1Protocol 2Protocol 3Data 1Protocol 4Data 2
Xiabao IIYoung leaves dissectionDNA extractionWhole-genome shotgun sequencing https://identifiers.org/ncbi/insdc.sra:SRP144706 Accession range: SRR7135464-SRR7135488De novo genome assembly and annotation https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore Accession range: CP039345-CP039355
https://db.cngb.org/search/?q=CNP0000264&from=CNSA
10.6084/m9.figshare.8131823
97 F2 individualsYoung leaves dissectionDNA extractionWhole-genome resequencing https://identifiers.org/ncbi/insdc.sra:SRP144706 Accession range: SRR7125688-SRR7125784Genetic map construction and chromosome assembly 10.6084/m9.figshare.8131823
Xiabao IIRoot and stem tissuesRNA extractionRNA-seq 10.6084/m9.figshare.8131535 Annotation based on RNA-seq 10.6084/m9.figshare.8131823
Experimental study and data records.

Technical Validation

DNA sample quality

DNA was quantified using 0.8% agarose gel electrophoresis and Qubit Fluorometer (Invitrogen, US). DNA concentrations were normalized to 100 ng/µl for subsequent library construction.

Assessment of the genome assembly and annotation

Completeness of the genome assembly was assessed with default settings using the Benchmarking Universal Single-Copy Orthologs (BUSCO)[48] approach with a total of 1440 orthologue groups from the Embryophyta Dataset. The results showed that 93.2% of the core orthologs could be found in the asparagus bean genome, indicating a high-integrity assembly superior to the other four legume genomes. We aligned the raw reads from short insert-size sequencing back to the assembly and showed that approximately 94.88% of short reads could be successfully mapped. Furthermore, a previously reported high-density linkage map (“ZZ” linkage map v.2)[5] was used to assess the quality of anchored scaffolds. The sequences of 7,964 SNPs markers were aligned onto the 11 pseudo chromosomes using BLAT with parameters of “-fine”[49]. High accordance was shown between the assembled genome and the linkage map (Fig. 4). Whole genome comparative analysis was also conducted between this assembly and the cowpea genome available from Phytozome[11] by the MUMmer with nucmer[50], presenting high collinearities with four inconsistent areas, which are located in the low-recombination regions (Fig. 5).
Fig. 4

Synteny between asparagus bean pseudo-chromosomes and “ZZ v.2” linkage map. Each linkage on the right corresponds to one chromosome on the left with lines.

Fig. 5

Comparative genome analysis between Xiabao II and IT97K-499-35a. Black arrows indicated the inconsistent areas between these two genomes.

Synteny between asparagus bean pseudo-chromosomes and “ZZ v.2” linkage map. Each linkage on the right corresponds to one chromosome on the left with lines. Comparative genome analysis between Xiabao II and IT97K-499-35a. Black arrows indicated the inconsistent areas between these two genomes.

Comparison of asparagus bean genome with published common cowpea genomes

A comparison was performed (Table 11) between the asparagus bean genome and previously published common cowpea assemblies[8,10,11]. The asparagus bean genome assembly (549.81 Mb, non-N) was significantly larger than the first published IT97K-499-35b genome[8]. Its size was close to the other three common cowpea survey assemblies (IT97K-499-35a11,IT97K-499-35c and IT86D-1010)[10]. The scaffold N50 size of our asparagus bean genome was 2.7 Mb, longer than the other three genomes assembled by the next-generation sequencing technology. Moreover, the asparagus bean assembly had about 94% of the scaffolds anchored into 11 pseudo-chromosomes according to the high-density genetic map. In addition, a set of 42,287 common cowpea coding sequences (CDS) derived from the single molecule real-time technology[11] could be blasted back to our asparagus bean genome with 90% similarity. All these results showed that the asparagus bean genome was of high quality.
Table 11

Comparisons of other four published cowpea assemblies.

Xiabao IIIT97K-499-35aIT97K-499-35bIT97K-499-35cIT86D-1010
Assembled Non-N Size (Mb)549.81518.8323.3568.1609.5
GC content (%)28.7832.9935.9633.633.59
Repeat elements (%)46.4749.5NANANA
Scaffold N50 size (kb)2730.2616,417.666.3317.9236.69
Total scaffolds21,836722644,12657,59039,123
Number of Anchored into chromosomes1,55647NANANA
Annotated protein-coding genes42,60929,773NANANA
Numbers of CDSd41,45742,28714,99440,05540,198

aIT97K-499-35 assembled by Lonardi et al. 2019.

bIT97K-499-35 assembled by Munoz-Amatriain et al. 2017.

cIT97K-499-35 assembled by Spriggs et al. 2018.

dA total of 4,2287 cds sequences from Vigna unguiculata v1.0, NSF, UCR, USAID, DOE-JGI, http://phytozome.jgi.doe.gov/.

Comparisons of other four published cowpea assemblies. aIT97K-499-35 assembled by Lonardi et al. 2019. bIT97K-499-35 assembled by Munoz-Amatriain et al. 2017. cIT97K-499-35 assembled by Spriggs et al. 2018. dA total of 4,2287 cds sequences from Vigna unguiculata v1.0, NSF, UCR, USAID, DOE-JGI, http://phytozome.jgi.doe.gov/. Download metadata file
Design Type(s)sequence assembly objective • sequence annotation objective
Measurement Type(s)genome assembly
Technology Type(s)DNA sequencing
Factor Type(s)
Sample Characteristic(s)Vigna unguiculata subsp. sesquipedalis • leaf
  39 in total

1.  AUGUSTUS: a web server for gene finding in eukaryotes.

Authors:  Mario Stanke; Rasmus Steinkamp; Stephan Waack; Burkhard Morgenstern
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2004-07-01       Impact factor: 16.971

2.  Tandem repeats finder: a program to analyze DNA sequences.

Authors:  G Benson
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  1999-01-15       Impact factor: 16.971

3.  BUSCO: assessing genome assembly and annotation completeness with single-copy orthologs.

Authors:  Felipe A Simão; Robert M Waterhouse; Panagiotis Ioannidis; Evgenia V Kriventseva; Evgeny M Zdobnov
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2015-06-09       Impact factor: 6.937

4.  An improved genetic linkage map for cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.) combining AFLP, RFLP, RAPD, biochemical markers, and biological resistance traits.

Authors:  J T Ouédraogo; B S Gowda; M Jean; T J Close; J D Ehlers; A E Hall; A G Gillaspie; P A Roberts; A M Ismail; G Bruening; P Gepts; M P Timko; F J Belzile
Journal:  Genome       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 2.166

5.  Using GeneWise in the Drosophila annotation experiment.

Authors:  E Birney; R Durbin
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 9.043

6.  Genome resources for climate-resilient cowpea, an essential crop for food security.

Authors:  María Muñoz-Amatriaín; Hamid Mirebrahim; Pei Xu; Steve I Wanamaker; MingCheng Luo; Hind Alhakami; Matthew Alpert; Ibrahim Atokple; Benoit J Batieno; Ousmane Boukar; Serdar Bozdag; Ndiaga Cisse; Issa Drabo; Jeffrey D Ehlers; Andrew Farmer; Christian Fatokun; Yong Q Gu; Yi-Ning Guo; Bao-Lam Huynh; Scott A Jackson; Francis Kusi; Cynthia T Lawley; Mitchell R Lucas; Yaqin Ma; Michael P Timko; Jiajie Wu; Frank You; Noelle A Barkley; Philip A Roberts; Stefano Lonardi; Timothy J Close
Journal:  Plant J       Date:  2017-02-03       Impact factor: 6.417

7.  Assembled genomic and tissue-specific transcriptomic data resources for two genetically distinct lines of Cowpea ( Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp).

Authors:  Andrew Spriggs; Steven T Henderson; Melanie L Hand; Susan D Johnson; Jennifer M Taylor; Anna Koltunow
Journal:  Gates Open Res       Date:  2018-06-18

8.  Sequencing and analysis of the gene-rich space of cowpea.

Authors:  Michael P Timko; Paul J Rushton; Thomas W Laudeman; Marta T Bokowiec; Edmond Chipumuro; Foo Cheung; Christopher D Town; Xianfeng Chen
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2008-02-27       Impact factor: 3.969

9.  Genomic regions, cellular components and gene regulatory basis underlying pod length variations in cowpea (V. unguiculata L. Walp).

Authors:  Pei Xu; Xinyi Wu; María Muñoz-Amatriaín; Baogen Wang; Xiaohua Wu; Yaowen Hu; Bao-Lam Huynh; Timothy J Close; Philip A Roberts; Wen Zhou; Zhongfu Lu; Guojing Li
Journal:  Plant Biotechnol J       Date:  2016-10-17       Impact factor: 9.803

10.  Genome sequence of the progenitor of wheat A subgenome Triticum urartu.

Authors:  Hong-Qing Ling; Bin Ma; Xiaoli Shi; Hui Liu; Lingli Dong; Hua Sun; Yinghao Cao; Qiang Gao; Shusong Zheng; Ye Li; Ying Yu; Huilong Du; Ming Qi; Yan Li; Hongwei Lu; Hua Yu; Yan Cui; Ning Wang; Chunlin Chen; Huilan Wu; Yan Zhao; Juncheng Zhang; Yiwen Li; Wenjuan Zhou; Bairu Zhang; Weijuan Hu; Michiel J T van Eijk; Jifeng Tang; Hanneke M A Witsenboer; Shancen Zhao; Zhensheng Li; Aimin Zhang; Daowen Wang; Chengzhi Liang
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2018-05-09       Impact factor: 49.962

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Breeding of Vegetable Cowpea for Nutrition and Climate Resilience in Sub-Saharan Africa: Progress, Opportunities, and Challenges.

Authors:  Tesfaye Walle Mekonnen; Abe Shegro Gerrano; Ntombokulunga Wedy Mbuma; Maryke Tine Labuschagne
Journal:  Plants (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-15

2.  Chromosome-level genome assembly of golden pompano (Trachinotus ovatus) in the family Carangidae.

Authors:  Dian-Chang Zhang; Liang Guo; Hua-Yang Guo; Ke-Cheng Zhu; Shang-Qi Li; Yan Zhang; Nan Zhang; Bao-Suo Liu; Shi-Gui Jiang; Jiong-Tang Li
Journal:  Sci Data       Date:  2019-10-22       Impact factor: 6.444

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.