RESUMO
The tuatara (Sphenodon punctatus)-the only living member of the reptilian order Rhynchocephalia (Sphenodontia), once widespread across Gondwana1,2-is an iconic species that is endemic to New Zealand2,3. A key link to the now-extinct stem reptiles (from which dinosaurs, modern reptiles, birds and mammals evolved), the tuatara provides key insights into the ancestral amniotes2,4. Here we analyse the genome of the tuatara, which-at approximately 5 Gb-is among the largest of the vertebrate genomes yet assembled. Our analyses of this genome, along with comparisons with other vertebrate genomes, reinforce the uniqueness of the tuatara. Phylogenetic analyses indicate that the tuatara lineage diverged from that of snakes and lizards around 250 million years ago. This lineage also shows moderate rates of molecular evolution, with instances of punctuated evolution. Our genome sequence analysis identifies expansions of proteins, non-protein-coding RNA families and repeat elements, the latter of which show an amalgam of reptilian and mammalian features. The sequencing of the tuatara genome provides a valuable resource for deep comparative analyses of tetrapods, as well as for tuatara biology and conservation. Our study also provides important insights into both the technical challenges and the cultural obligations that are associated with genome sequencing.
Assuntos
Evolução Molecular , Genoma/genética , Filogenia , Répteis/genética , Animais , Conservação dos Recursos Naturais/tendências , Feminino , Genética Populacional , Lagartos/genética , Masculino , Anotação de Sequência Molecular , Nova Zelândia , Caracteres Sexuais , Serpentes/genética , SinteniaRESUMO
An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Computational biology provides software tools for testing and making inferences about biological data. In the face of increasing volumes of data, heuristic methods that trade software speed for accuracy may be employed. We have studied these trade-offs using the results of a large number of independent software benchmarks, and evaluated whether external factors, including speed, author reputation, journal impact, recency and developer efforts, are indicative of accurate software. RESULTS: We find that software speed, author reputation, journal impact, number of citations and age are unreliable predictors of software accuracy. This is unfortunate because these are frequently cited reasons for selecting software tools. However, GitHub-derived statistics and high version numbers show that accurate bioinformatic software tools are generally the product of many improvements over time. We also find an excess of slow and inaccurate bioinformatic software tools, and this is consistent across many sub-disciplines. There are few tools that are middle-of-road in terms of accuracy and speed trade-offs. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that accurate bioinformatic software is primarily the product of long-term commitments to software development. In addition, we hypothesise that bioinformatics software suffers from publication bias. Software that is intermediate in terms of both speed and accuracy may be difficult to publish-possibly due to author, editor and reviewer practises. This leaves an unfortunate hole in the literature, as ideal tools may fall into this gap. High accuracy tools are not always useful if they are slow, while high speed is not useful if the results are also inaccurate.