Search for: All records

Abstract The rapid increase in the number of reference-quality genome assemblies presents significant new opportunities for genomic research. However, the absence of standardized naming conventions for genome assemblies and annotations across datasets creates substantial challenges. Inconsistent naming hinders the identification of correct assemblies, complicates the integration of bioinformatics pipelines, and makes it difficult to link assemblies across multiple resources. To address this, we developed a specification for standardizing the naming of reference genome assemblies, to improve consistency across datasets and facilitate interoperability. This specification was created with FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) practices in mind, ensuring that reference assemblies are easier to locate, access, and reuse across research communities. Additionally, it has been designed to comply with primary genomic data repositories, including members of the International Nucleotide Sequence Database Collaboration consortium, ensuring compatibility with widely used databases. While initially tailored to the agricultural genomics community, the specification is adaptable for use across different taxa. Widespread adoption of this standardized nomenclature would streamline assembly management, better enable cross-species analyses, and improve the reproducibility of research. It would also enhance natural language processing applications that depend on consistent reference assembly names in genomic literature, promoting greater integration and automated analysis of genomic data. This is a good time to consider more consistent genomic data nomenclature as many research communities and data resources are now finding themselves juggling multiple datasets from multiple data providers. 

Continuous culture systems allow for the controlled growth of microorganisms over a long period of time. Here, we develop a novel test for mutagenicity that involves growing yeast in continuous culture systems exposed to low levels of mutagen for a period of approximately 20 days. In contrast, most microorganism-based tests for mutagenicity expose the potential mutagen to the biological reporter at a high concentration of mutagen for a short period of time. Our test improves upon the sensitivity of the well-established Ames test by at least 20-fold for each of two mutagens that act by different mechanisms (the intercalator ethidium bromide and alkylating agent methyl methanesulfonate). To conduct the tests, cultures were grown in small, inexpensive continuous culture systems in media containing (potential) mutagen, and the resulting mutagenicity of the added compound was assessed via two methods: a canavanine-based plate assay and whole genome sequencing. In the canavanine-based plate assay, we were able to detect a clear relationship between the amount of mutagen and the number of canavanine-resistant mutant colonies over a period of one to three weeks of exposure. Whole genome sequencing of yeast grown in continuous culture systems exposed to methyl methanesulfonate demonstrated that quantification of mutations is possible by identifying the number of unique variants across each strain. However, this method had lower sensitivity than the plate-based assay and failed to distinguish the different concentrations of mutagen. In conclusion, we propose that yeast grown in continuous culture systems can provide an improved and more sensitive test for mutagenicity.