To find repeats in a genome from 2 to 9 length using a Perl script, you can use the RepeatMasker tool with the "--length" option[0]. Here's a step-by-step guide:

• Using state of the art tools, easily extended for other viruses

• Tool and database updates for critical components via Conda

• Built using modern design patterns with Conda and Snakemake

• Extensible and easy to customize

• Submission Ready Genomes

• Customizable reporting with comprehensive visualization

https://ikim-essen.github.io/uncovar/

Github https://github.com/IKIM-Essen/uncovar

Address of the bookmark: https://ikim-essen.github.io/uncovar/

Overview of SLiM and msprime

SLiM: Forward Genetic Simulator

SLiM is a free, open-source tool designed for forward genetic simulations. It allows researchers to model complex evolutionary scenarios, including selection, recombination, and demographic events, making it particularly useful for studying adaptation and selection in populations.

Key Features of SLiM:

• Simulates population evolution forward in time

• Supports custom evolutionary models using an embedded scripting language

• Allows modeling of spatial and ecological dynamics

• Provides high flexibility and extensibility for user-defined scenarios

• Available on GitHub as an open-source project

msprime: Ancestry and Mutation Simulator

msprime is an efficient, open-source tool that simulates ancestry and mutations using a coalescent framework. It is known for its high-speed performance and low memory requirements, making it a popular choice for large-scale genomic simulations.

Key Features of msprime:

• Implements coalescent simulations for ancestry modeling

• Efficiently simulates large population histories

• Supports the addition of mutations to genealogies

• Developed using an open-source community model

• Often faster and more memory-efficient than alternative simulators

Using SLiM and msprime with slendr

Both SLiM and msprime can be integrated with slendr, a framework that facilitates structured population genetic simulations. This integration allows for seamless comparison of simulation outputs.

How They Work Together:

• SLiM and msprime simulations can be analyzed within slendr.

• The ts_read() function in slendr enables loading and comparing tree sequence outputs from both simulators.

• This integration allows researchers to validate simulation results and gain deeper insights into evolutionary processes.

Performance Considerations

While SLiM offers powerful forward simulations with extensive customization, msprime is often preferred for its speed and memory efficiency when simulating ancestry and mutations. The choice between the two depends on the research goals:

• For detailed evolutionary modeling with selection and recombination: Use SLiM.

• For large-scale coalescent simulations with mutations: Use msprime.

• For comparing different simulation models and their outputs: Use slendr to integrate SLiM and msprime results.

Conclusion

SLiM and msprime are valuable tools for genome simulation, each serving distinct but complementary purposes in population genetics research. By leveraging the strengths of both simulators with slendr, researchers can conduct robust and efficient evolutionary simulations, enhancing our understanding of genetic diversity and adaptation.

For more information, check out the official GitHub repositories for SLiM and msprime, and explore the slendr framework for streamlined simulation workflow

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

Address of the bookmark: https://github.com/chilleo/ALPHA

It is enormous, billions of letters long. Some of those letters are easy to understand because they contain instructions for building proteins, the tiny machines that keep our cells alive.

But what if some of the most important instructions aren't in those obvious chapters?

Scientists have long suspected that the mysterious stretches of DNA between protein-coding genes may contain some of life's most interesting secrets. These regions can act like switches, telling genes when, where, and how strongly to turn on. Among them are conserved non-coding elements, or CNEs DNA sequences that have remained remarkably similar across different species.

Think of a CNE as a sentence that nature has copied into several editions of the same book.

A mouse has it.

A bird has it.

A human has it.

And despite millions of years of evolution, much of the sentence remains almost unchanged.

That conservation is a clue: this piece of DNA probably matters.

But there was a problem. Finding these hidden sentences across enormous genomes is difficult. Researchers needed to compare many genomes, identify conserved regions, and then determine which of those regions might have evolved unusually quickly in particular branches of the evolutionary tree.

Enter CNEwrap. https://github.com/YanCCscu/CNEwrap

The researchers developed CNEwrap as a streamlined toolkit capable of handling large-scale genome comparisons, conserved-element detection, and evolutionary analysis. Inside it is a new algorithm called EvoAcc, designed to identify CNEs that show accelerated evolution in specific species or lineages.

Why does that matter?

Because evolution isn't just about what stays the same.

Sometimes, the most interesting story is hidden in what changed.

Imagine that nearly every species carries the same regulatory sentence, but one lineage suddenly has several unusual edits. Perhaps those changes helped shape a new body structure, a different adaptation, or another distinctive trait.

EvoAcc is designed to help researchers find these evolutionary clues. In the study's tests, it performed particularly well in scenarios involving two or three accelerated lineages and showed improved sensitivity to insertion and deletion mutations compared with several existing approaches.

The researchers also tested CNEwrap using functional genomic regions from mammals and found that EvoAcc could recover human-specific accelerated regions while identifying some signals that other methods missed.

So the story of CNEwrap is really a story about looking beyond the obvious.

For decades, scientists have often focused on the DNA that directly encodes proteins. But the genome is more like a vast library: the protein-coding genes are the main text, while non-coding regions may contain punctuation, instructions, switches, annotations, and editing notes that tell the cell how to read the book.

CNEwrap gives researchers a new way to search that hidden material.

And perhaps somewhere inside those billions of DNA letters is an evolutionary story we haven't read yet.

The exciting part is that we now have better tools to find it.

Read more about it https://academic.oup.com/nar/article/54/14/gkag709/8738333?

More at http://www.atgc.org/PhyloGrapher/PhyloGrapher_Welcome.html

Address of the bookmark: http://www.atgc.org/PhyloGrapher/PhyloGrapher_Welcome.html

Blobsplorer is unlikely to be of use on its own as it requires contig data to be supplied in a format that involves considerable preprocessing (see below for a description). The easiest way to use Blobsplorer is as part of a workflow using scripts from here.

Address of the bookmark: http://nematodes.org/martin/blobsplorer/blobsplorer.html