The only input requierement for UPhO is a tree (or trees) in Newick format in which the leaves are named with a species idenfifier, a field separator, and sequence identifier. By default, the field separator is the character "|" but custom delimiters can be defined. Examples of trees to test UPhO are provided in the TestData folder.

Address of the bookmark: https://github.com/ballesterus/UPhO

SyRI, a pairwise whole-genome comparison tool for chromosome-level assemblies. SyRI starts by finding rearranged regions and then searches for differences in the sequences, which are distinguished for residing in syntenic or rearranged regions. This distinction is important as rearranged regions are inherited differently compared to syntenic regions.

https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-019-1911-0

Address of the bookmark: https://github.com/schneebergerlab/syri

Address of the bookmark: https://academic.oup.com/bioinformatics/article/39/12/btad719/7460198?login=false

This work has been accepted for publication:

MacDonald NJ, Parks DH, and Beiko RG. Rapid identification of taxonomic assignments. Accepted to Nucleic Acids Research April 4, 2012.

If you have any questions or bug reports, please let us know at <beiko@cs.dal.ca>.

Address of the bookmark: http://kiwi.cs.dal.ca/Software/RITA

See the new IgBLAST manual on the NCBI GitHub site for more information on setting up and running IgBLAST.

If you have any questions or concerns, please email us at blast-help@ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

• AssemblyMapper : reference-guided genome assembly
• GapFiller : long-reads based gap filling
• TeloExplorer : telomere identification
• CentroMiner : centromere candidate prediction

https://academic.oup.com/hr/article/10/8/uhad127/7197191?login=false 

Address of the bookmark: http://www.atcgn.com:8080/quarTeT/home.html

More at https://github.com/mills-lab/svelter/

Address of the bookmark: https://github.com/mills-lab/svelter/

Mauve has been developed with the idea that a multiple genome aligner should require only modest computational resources. It employs algorithmic techniques that scale well in the lengths of sequences being aligned. For example, a pair of Y. pestis genomes can be aligned in under a minute, while a group of 9 divergent Enterobacterial genomes can be aligned in a few hours. However, the current algorithm’s compute time (progressiveMauve) scales cubically in the number of genomes to align, making it unsuitable for datasets containing more than 50-100 bacterial genomes.

Address of the bookmark: http://darlinglab.org/mauve/mauve.html

• Step 1. Run mugsy to get multiple sequence alignment results.
• Step 2 & 3. Extraction of the Coordinates of Core Blocks, Construction of Synteny Blocks and Generating Signed Permutations.
• Step 4. Generate pairwise genome rearrangement scenarios and find repeats at the breakpoints of each rearrangement events.

https://github.com/DanwangJessica/GRSR

Address of the bookmark: https://github.com/DanwangJessica/GRSR

The most common newbie questions are:

Should I try to use these free open source programs?  Why are we not trying GUI software for computational analysis? Should I use commercial bioinformatics programs/software?”

1. Let’s be open

We generally think free and cheap are useless. But this concept is not applicable when we discuss open source software. Mostly, the bioinformatics software is developed by highly competitive biological programmers who believe in open sharing of knowledge. They come under Open Bioinformatics Foundation or O|B|F which is a non-profit, volunteer run organization focused on supporting open source programming in bioinformatics. The best part about open source tools/software is that they’re free to download the source code and read exactly what the program does. If you are so inclined, you can view all of the parts of the program and see the logical flow of the pipeline. In addition, open source makes an excellent learning tool for any beginning bioinformatician. Moreover, you can modify existing open source programs to deal with cutting-edge problems or to customize your pipeline. Apart from your computational and analysis work, most of the reviewer also prefers the open source based results so that they can validate the results if validation required.

2. Code headache

As a bioinformatician you are supposed to know the basics of programming languages, and if you are not good at it, then please learn it as soon as possible because you are not a bio-analyst but biological programmers. The open source programs usually lack dedicated service and support teams (often because they were the product of an overworked doc/postdoc!) so you are responsible for troubleshooting your own errors most of the time. We commonly receive the HELP email to support and assist to setup the pipeline; you can also find this kind of request on any QA forum. I personally believe this coding horror brings the biggest downside of open-source programs; where you need some programming skills in order to implement the program in your pipeline. But, if you are not able to fix the pipeline and modify the open source code according to your requirements them you should re-think on your bioinformatician name tag!!!

3. Dive into the codes

Some of the biologist turn bioinformatician says “if you can do the same thing with commercial software then why to get migraine with weird codes”, well this statement looks to me that guys are keen to learn swimming but still don’t like to get wet. If you are still using paid software and doing your work by customer support and clicking some of the well-designed GUI button then perhaps you are not interested in learning and trying new and challenging bioinformatics works. You are missing the basic flavour of bioinformatics. Let’s dive into the coding world, I am sure your will enjoy it. I recommend your to swim freely in code’s sea, and enjoy the journey; do not merely watch it from the outside.  

4. Paid does not mean better

The bioinformatics company which are specializes in bioinformatics solutions develop well designed/packed, user friendly software by using a large number of specialised scientist, programmers and support staff. They also provide good services to accomplice your biological analysis work. This means that if you hit a ‘snag’ with your data, help is likely only a phone call away! These companies price their products competitively against the cost of a dedicated bioinformatician. You may be able to afford the program, but not the additional staff! Additionally, most of the functionality that you need in your analysis is already coded into the program. Need to plot a graph? Just click this button right here. It is that easy. But, as a bioinformatician this is not generally well encouraged approach in biological analysis work, because the software is not available to everyone and your data can’t be validated. Moreover, there is very less chances that anyone will repeat your work or love to do similar kind of research (because not all the labs in the world are rich like yours).

5. Take a caution

In biological analysis work, in which you deal GB/TB of data are having maximum chances of getting errors, so please be careful and always cross check your data before coming to any conclusion. Even an error in two line code can alter your entire analysis and display weird results. Some of the scientist blindly believes on commercial software, which is entirely wrong. Using proprietary tools does not absolve you of the need to actually read and research the type of analysis that you are doing. This is particularly true in the case of genome assembly and annotation.

At the end, I would like to tell only one think that open source solutions allows you to do more cutting edge analysis than the commercial tools. So let’s go for it.

Disclaimer:

This is my personal view. I have nothing to do with any company or open source community. The views expressed on these pages are mine alone and not those of my current/past employers. I do reserve the right to remove comments left by spammers or off-topic comments.