
With the development of ultra-high-throughput technologies, the cost of sequencing bacterial genomes has been vastly reduced. As more genomes are sequenced, less time can be spent manually annotating those genomes, resulting in an increased reliance on automatic annotation pipelines. However, automatic pipelines can produce inaccurate genome annotation and their results often require manual curation. Here, we discuss the automatic and manual annotation of bacterial genomes, identify common problems introduced by the current genome annotation process and suggests potential solutions.
/dk/atira/pure/subjectarea/asjc/1300/1312, Computational Biology, Molecular Sequence Annotation, Salmonella, Papers, Databases, Genetic, Escherichia coli, /dk/atira/pure/subjectarea/asjc/1700/1710, Molecular Biology, Genome, Bacterial, Software, Information Systems
/dk/atira/pure/subjectarea/asjc/1300/1312, Computational Biology, Molecular Sequence Annotation, Salmonella, Papers, Databases, Genetic, Escherichia coli, /dk/atira/pure/subjectarea/asjc/1700/1710, Molecular Biology, Genome, Bacterial, Software, Information Systems
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 110 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 1% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% |
