PHAST, PHASTER and PHASTEST: Tools for finding prophage in bacterial genomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PHAST (PHAge Search Tool) and its successor PHASTER (PHAge Search Tool - Enhanced Release) have become two of the most widely used web servers for identifying putative prophages in bacterial genomes. Here we review the main capabilities of these web resources, provide some practical guidance regarding their use and discuss possible future improvements. PHAST, which was first described in 2011, made its debut just as whole bacterial genome sequencing and was becoming inexpensive and relatively routine. PHAST quickly gained popularity among bacterial genome researchers because of its web accessibility, its ease of use along with its enhanced accuracy and rapid processing times. PHASTER, which appeared in 2016, provided a number of much-needed enhancements to the PHAST server, including greater processing speed (to cope with very large submission volumes), increased database sizes, a more modern user interface, improved graphical displays and support for metagenomic submissions. Continuing developments in the field, along with increased interest in automated phage and prophage finding, have already led to several improvements to the PHASTER server and will soon lead to the development of a successor to PHASTER (to be called PHASTEST).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".