That is the challenge researchers face when studying how bacteria adapt to different environments. A bacterial gene may appear to be linked to a particular habitat, when the real reason is simply that closely related bacteria happen to live there.

In their 2025 Genome Biology paper, Bujdoš, Walter, and O’Toole introduce aurora, a machine-learning tool designed to tackle this problem.

Aurora identifies potentially mislabeled or unusual bacterial strains before performing genome-wide association studies (GWAS). By cleaning up the dataset and accounting for bacterial evolutionary relationships, it can help researchers find genetic features that are more genuinely connected to habitat adaptation.

The researchers tested aurora using simulated and real bacterial datasets and found that it could recover important genetic associations even when datasets contained misleading labels.

The bigger lesson is simple: better biological discoveries often begin with better data.

Aurora gives researchers a new way to separate real genetic clues from misleading ones—and could help us better understand how bacteria adapt, survive, and evolve in the environments they call home.

Based on Bujdoš et al., “aurora: a machine learning GWAS tool for analyzing microbial habitat adaptation,” Genome Biology (2025).[Read the original paper](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13059-025-03524-7?)

Research Directions

Stony corals: evolution of novelty and photosymbiosis

Symbiotic acoels: cell type evolution and photosymbiosis

Animal genomes: structural evolution and gene regulation

https://sgel.biodiv.tw/home

A recent study published in Genome Biology (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13059-026-04280-y) addressed this challenge by introducing dicast (https://github.com/burgshrimps/dicast), a machine-learning approach for detecting structural variants in short-read sequencing data. Structural variants, such as large deletions, insertions, duplications, and inversions, can have significant biological and clinical implications, yet they are challenging to identify with short-read technologies. Because different detection methods frequently yield divergent results, researchers commonly employ consensus calling, considering a variant valid only if multiple tools detect it. While this approach reduces false positives, it relies on the potentially flawed assumption that the majority is always correct.

The researchers explored the impact of evaluating the supporting evidence for each variant, rather than simply tallying the number of algorithms that identified it. To establish a ground truth, they analyzed nine genomes using multiple sequencing technologies and 15 detection methods, initially identifying approximately 35 million potential variants. Through extensive filtering, evidence integration, and manual review of over 11,500 variants, they developed a robust benchmark comprising more than 236,000 structural variants. The findings underscored the complexity of the problem: short-read methods detected fewer than half of deletions and less than 10 percent of insertions, with performance declining markedly in repetitive genomic regions. In contrast, long-read technologies demonstrated superior detection capabilities. However, replacing the substantial volume of existing short-read data in clinical and research settings is not immediately feasible. Consequently, the researchers questioned whether short-read data might harbor more information than conventional analytical pipelines currently extract.

This line of inquiry led to the development of dicast. Rather than merely confirming agreement among multiple tools, dicast identifies patterns in sequencing data, including split and clipped reads, discordant read pairs, alignment characteristics, and the surrounding genomic context. An XGBoost machine-learning model evaluates which combinations of these signals are indicative of genuine structural variants. Thus, the approach shifts from tallying algorithmic consensus to interpreting the underlying evidence.

The researchers subsequently conducted a targeted evaluation by examining structural variants detected by only a single short-read tool, which are typically missed by consensus-based approaches. dicast successfully recovered approximately 81% of these single-caller deletions, insertions, and duplications. The signals for these variants were present in the data, but conventional filtering methods failed to integrate them effectively.

The utility of dicast was further demonstrated in cohorts with rare diseases, including congenital limb malformations, atrial fibrillation, and neuromuscular disorders. In one instance, dicast achieved a deletion recall rate of approximately 0.96, compared to 0.74 using consensus calling. The median number of variants requiring manual review was 29 per sample. Among 31 experimentally validated variants that standard filters would have missed, dicast identified 12, whereas consensus calling detected only one.

Overall, dicast identified approximately 20 percent more potential disease-causing deletions than consensus-based methods. While a 20 percent increase may appear modest, in clinical genomics such improvements can have significant practical implications. Missing a deletion may leave a case unresolved, whereas detecting a structural variant can provide critical diagnostic insights.

The study does not claim that machine learning has rendered short-read sequencing superior to long-read approaches. Instead, the results underscore the effectiveness of long-read sequencing for structural variant detection. However, dicast highlights a more nuanced perspective: substantial biological information may still be recoverable from the extensive short-read datasets already available.

The principal lesson extends beyond the detection of structural variants. For many years, bioinformatics pipelines have relied on threshold-based criteria, such as minimum coverage, quality scores, or support from multiple tools. While these rules are useful, biological phenomena do not always conform to rigid checklists; multiple weak signals, when considered collectively, can provide compelling evidence.

This perspective prompts consideration of the solitary variant: one algorithm identifies it, while several others do not. Traditional consensus techniques might have dismissed it, yet machine learning approaches evaluate the available evidence to determine whether the variant is plausible.

Occasionally, the most significant variant within a genome is the one that is almost universally overlooked.

Read more at https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13059-026-04280-y

Usually, errors in PacBio reads include many insertions and deletions, and comparatively less substitutions. LoRDEC can correct errors of all these types.
After correction, a larger portion of the sequence of PacBio reads is usable for detection of region of similarity with other sequences, for aligning them to the contigs of an assembly, etc.

Why is LoRDEC different?

• It is efficient and can process large read data sets, included from eukaryotic or vertebrate species, on a usual computing server, and even works on desktop/laptop computers.
• It adopts a novel graph based approach: it builds a succinct De Bruijn Graph (DBG) representing the short reads, and seeks a corrective sequence for each erroneous region of a long read by traversing chosen paths in the graph.

Address of the bookmark: http://www.atgc-montpellier.fr/lordec/

Address of the bookmark: http://www.softberry.com/berry.phtml?topic=fgenesh&group=help&subgroup=gfind

Tbl2asn is available by anonymous FTP. Copy the right version for your platform, then uncompress the file, rename it to "tbl2asn", and set the permissions, as necessary for the platform.

Address of the bookmark: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genbank/tbl2asn2/

I made Rebaler for bacterial genomes (specifically for the task of testing basecallers). It should in principle work for non-bacterial genomes as well, but I haven't tested it.

Address of the bookmark: https://github.com/rrwick/Rebaler

[Download software package (includes the manual)] (you will be directed first to a registration page and we would very much appreciate if you register) 
[Download manual] 
[Download software note from Molecular Ecology Notes 4: 137-138 (2004)]

To use the UNIX versions, unzip and untar the files in an appropriate directory using

gunzip filename.tar.gz; tar xvf filename.tar

where "filename.tar.gz" is the downloaded file. Winzip will unzip the Windows version. Run the program by typing

./distruct

in UNIX or

distruct

from a Dos prompt in Windows. It will produce a figure using the data that are represented in the Central/South Asia K=5 plot in Science 298: 2381-2385 (2002).

Please send comments or problems with distruct to Noah Rosenberg.

October 15, 2014 — Users of Distruct may also find CLUMPP and CLUMPAK of interest.

Address of the bookmark: https://rosenberglab.stanford.edu/distruct.html

Stable version with pip:

pip3 install --user chromosight

Stable version with conda:

conda install -c bioconda -c conda-forge chromosight

or, if you want to get the latest development version:

pip3 install --user -e git+https://github.com/koszullab/chromosight.git@master#egg=chromosight

Address of the bookmark: https://github.com/koszullab/Chromosight

WiseScaffolder is a stand-alone semi-automatic application for genome scaffolding of pre-assembled contigs using mate-pair data. It also produces editable scaffold maps, allowing either to build gapped scaffolds or usable as a common thread for the manual improvement of scaffolds.

Description 

WiseScaffolder includes 4 subcommands: dumpconfig generates a configuration file that notably specifies the average insert size of the mate-pair library preprocess allows the detection and correction of chimerae, the estimation of contigs copy number and produces valuable outputs for the manual improvement of scaffolds scaffold constitutes the central scaffold-builder and comprises two modules:

i) the interative_scaffold_extender, which works with big, unambiguous contigs, or when they run out, single copy contigs, and

ii) the small_contig_inserter, which inserts the small contigs within scaffolds buildfasta converts the scaffold(s) map(s) into Fasta sequences.

Address of the bookmark: http://abims.sb-roscoff.fr/wisescaffolder