ArticleGenome research2024
Nanopore strand-specific mismatch enables de novo detection of bacterial DNA modifications.
Article in Genome research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- High-resolution metagenome assembly for modern long reads with myloasm.Nature biotechnology · 2026Article
- Replication-coupled hemimethylation inFrontiers in microbiology · 2026Review
- High-resolution metagenome assembly for modern long reads with myloasm.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Comprehensive comparison of the third-generation sequencing tools for bacterial 6mA profiling.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Decoding bacterial methylomes in four public health-relevant microbial species: nanopore sequencing enables reproducible analysis of DNA modifications.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- Understanding prokaryotic adaptation through advanced DNA methylation detection techniques.The ISME journal · 2025Review
- Decoding the genome and epigenome of avianFrontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- Global DNA-methylation in quantitative epigenetics: orbitrap mass spectrometry.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
DNA modifications in bacteria present diverse types and distributions, playing crucial functional roles. Current methods for detecting bacterial DNA modifications via nanopore sequencing typically involve comparing raw current signals to a methylation-free control. In this study, we found that bacterial DNA modification induces errors in nanopore reads. And these errors are found only in one strand but not the other, showing a strand-specific bias. Leveraging this discovery, we developed Hammerhead, a pioneering pipeline designed for de novo methylation discovery that circumvents the necessity of raw signal inference and a methylation-free control. The majority (14 out of 16) of the identified motifs can be validated by raw signal comparison methods or by identifying corresponding methyltransferases in bacteria. Additionally, we included a novel polishing strategy employing duplex reads to correct modification-induced errors in bacterial genome assemblies, achieving a reduction of over 85% in such errors. In summary, Hammerhead enables users to effectively locate bacterial DNA methylation sites from nanopore FASTQ/FASTA reads, thus holds promise as a routine pipeline for a wide range of nanopore sequencing applications, such as genome assembly, metagenomic binning, decontaminating eukaryotic genome assemblies, and functional analysis for DNA modifications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.