Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

Nature Research, Nature Methods, 4(19), p. 429-440, 2022

DOI: 10.1038/s41592-022-01431-4

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Critical Assessment of Metagenome Interpretation: the second round of challenges

Journal article published in 2022 by Gail L. Rosen, Hans-Joachim Ruscheweyh, Varuni Sarwal, Nicola Segata ORCID, Enrico Seiler, Lizhen Shi, Fengzhu Sun, Shinichi Sunagawa ORCID, Søren Johannes Sørensen ORCID, Ashleigh Thomas ORCID, Chengxuan Tong, Mirko Trajkovski ORCID, Julien Tremblay, Gherman Uritskiy, Riccardo Vicedomini ORCID and other authors.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

AbstractEvaluating metagenomic software is key for optimizing metagenome interpretation and focus of the Initiative for the Critical Assessment of Metagenome Interpretation (CAMI). The CAMI II challenge engaged the community to assess methods on realistic and complex datasets with long- and short-read sequences, created computationally from around 1,700 new and known genomes, as well as 600 new plasmids and viruses. Here we analyze 5,002 results by 76 program versions. Substantial improvements were seen in assembly, some due to long-read data. Related strains still were challenging for assembly and genome recovery through binning, as was assembly quality for the latter. Profilers markedly matured, with taxon profilers and binners excelling at higher bacterial ranks, but underperforming for viruses and Archaea. Clinical pathogen detection results revealed a need to improve reproducibility. Runtime and memory usage analyses identified efficient programs, including top performers with other metrics. The results identify challenges and guide researchers in selecting methods for analyses.