COBRA improves the completeness and contiguity of viral genomes assembled from metagenomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Viruses are often studied using metagenome-assembled sequences, but genome incompleteness hampers comprehensive and accurate analyses. Contig Overlap Based Re-Assembly (COBRA) resolves assembly breakpoints based on the de Bruijn graph and joins contigs. Here we benchmarked COBRA using ocean and soil viral datasets. COBRA accurately joined the assembled sequences and achieved notably higher genome accuracy than binning tools. From 231 published freshwater metagenomes, we obtained 7,334 bacteriophage clusters, ~83% of which represent new phage species. Notably, ~70% of these were circular, compared with 34% before COBRA analyses. We expanded sampling of huge phages (≥200 kbp), the largest of which was curated to completion (717 kbp). Improved phage genomes from Rotsee Lake provided context for metatranscriptomic data and indicated the in situ activity of huge phages, whiB-encoding phages and cysC- and cysH-encoding phages. COBRA improves viral genome assembly contiguity and completeness, thus the accuracy and reliability of analyses of gene content, diversity and evolution.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".