The genome sequence of the Common Sheetweb Spider Linyphia triangularis (Clerck, 1757)
Olga Sivell, Duncan Sivell, Miquel Arnedo, Madeleine E Aase-Remedios
TL;DR
This paper presents the genome sequence of the Common Sheetweb Spider, including its chromosomal structure and mitochondrial genome.
Contribution
The study provides a high-quality genome assembly with scaffolded chromosomal pseudomolecules and sex chromosomes for Linyphia triangularis.
Findings
The genome assembly is 1,349.10 megabases long with 95.36% scaffolded into 13 chromosomal pseudomolecules.
The mitochondrial genome is 15.31 kilobases in length and has been fully assembled.
Sex chromosomes X1 and X2 are included in the chromosomal scaffolding.
Abstract
We present a genome assembly from a male Linyphia triangularis (Common Sheetweb Spider Arthropoda; Arachnida; Araneae; Linyphiidae). The genome sequence has a total length of 1,349.10 megabases. Most of the assembly (95.36%) is scaffolded into 13 chromosomal pseudomolecules, including the X 1 and X 2 sex chromosomes. The mitochondrial genome has also been assembled and is 15.31 kilobases in length.
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
Click any figure to enlarge with its caption.
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5| Project information | |||
|---|---|---|---|
|
| Linyphia triangularis (European sheetweb spider) | ||
|
| PRJEB65733 | ||
|
|
| ||
|
| SAMEA111458582 | ||
|
| 94031 | ||
| Specimen information | |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| qqLinTria7 | SAMEA111458661 | head and thorax |
|
| qqLinTria9 | SAMEA111458698 | head and thorax |
| Sequencing information | |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ERR12035316 | 6.93e+08 | 104.61 |
|
| ERR12015774 | 7.32e+06 | 82.72 |
| Genome assembly | ||
|---|---|---|
| Assembly name | qqLinTria7.1 | |
| Assembly accession | GCA_963978545.1 | |
|
|
| |
| Assembly level for primary assembly | chromosome | |
| Span (Mb) | 1,349.10 | |
| Number of contigs | 662 | |
| Number of scaffolds | 373 | |
| Longest scaffold (Mb) | 127.92 | |
| Assembly metric | Measure |
|
| Contig N50 length | 6.25 Mb |
|
| Scaffold N50 length | 96.46 Mb |
|
| Consensus quality (QV) | Primary: 59.5; alternate: 59.7; combined 59.6 |
|
|
| Primary: 82.97%; alternate: 70.52%;
|
|
| BUSCO
| C:96.0%[S:90.8%,D:5.2%],
|
|
| Percentage of assembly mapped to
| 95.28% |
|
| Sex chromosomes | X 1 and X 2 |
|
| Organelles | Mitochondrial genome: 15.31 kb |
|
| INSDC accession | Name | Length (Mb) | GC% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 112.14 | 31.5 | |
| 2 | 111.4 | 31.5 | |
| 3 | 110.54 | 31.5 | |
| 4 | 105.52 | 31.5 | |
| 5 | 96.96 | 31.5 | |
| 6 | 96.46 | 31.5 | |
| 7 | 96.45 | 31.5 | |
| 8 | 93.26 | 32 | |
| 9 | 91.63 | 33.5 | |
| 10 | 91.91 | 32 | |
| 11 | 76.63 | 31.5 | |
| MT | 0.02 | 25.5 | |
| X1 | 127.92 | 31 | |
| X2 | 74.56 | 31 |
| Software
| Version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| BEDTools | 2.30.0 |
|
| BLAST | 2.14.0 |
|
| BlobToolKit | 4.3.9 |
|
| BUSCO | 5.5.0 |
|
| bwa-mem2 | 2.2.1 |
|
| Cooler | 0.8.11 |
|
| DIAMOND | 2.1.8 |
|
| fasta_
| 0.2.4 |
|
| FastK | 427104ea91c78c3b8b8b49f1a7d6bbeaa869ba1c |
|
| Gfastats | 1.3.6 |
|
| GoaT CLI | 0.2.5 |
|
| Hifiasm | 0.19.5-r587 |
|
| HiGlass | 44086069ee7d4d3f6f3f0012569789ec138f42b84a
|
|
| MerquryFK | d00d98157618f4e8d1a9190026b19b471055b22e |
|
| Minimap2 | 2.24-r1122 |
|
| MitoHiFi | 3 |
|
| MultiQC | 1.14, 1.17, and 1.18 |
|
| NCBI
| 15.12.0 |
|
| Nextflow | 23.04.1 |
|
| PretextView | 0.2.5 |
|
| purge_dups | 1.2.5 |
|
| samtools | 1.19.2 |
|
| sanger-tol/
| - |
|
| sanger-tol/
| 0.5.1 |
|
| Seqtk | 1.3 |
|
| Singularity | 3.9.0 |
|
| TreeVal | 1.2.0 |
|
| YaHS | 1.2a.2 |
|
- —Wellcome Trust
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies · Spider Taxonomy and Behavior Studies · Environmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
Species taxonomy
Eukaryota; Opisthokonta; Metazoa; Eumetazoa; Bilateria; Protostomia; Ecdysozoa; Panarthropoda; Arthropoda; Chelicerata; Arachnida; Araneae; Araneomorphae; Entelegynae; Orbiculariae; Araneoidea; Linyphiidae; Linyphiinae; Linyphia; Linyphia triangularis (Clerck, 1757) (NCBI:txid94031)
Background
Linyphia triangularis (Clerck, 1757) is a species belonging to the family Linyphiidae (Araneae), commonly known as money spiders. It is the largest spider family in Britain with approximately 280 species in 123 genera ( Bee et al., 2017). L. triangularis is fairly large for a linyphiid, males measuring 4.6–6.0 mm and females 5.0–6.6 mm. This species is easy to recognise by the pale brown carapace with dark brown margins and a “tuning fork” medial mark, yellowish brown legs with numerous spines and femora without dark spots. The female has a purplish abdominal pattern with pale, creamy-white and black streaks on the sides. The drawings of epigyne and chelicerae are provided by Roberts (1996).
Linyphia triangularis is a ubiquitous, common and widely distributed Palaearctic species that is abundant and widespread in Britain ( Bee et al., 2017; GBIF Secretariat, 2024; Harvey et al., 2002; Roberts, 1996). It has been accidentally introduced to North America. It became established in Maine (USA) where it outcompetes the native linyphiid species Frontinella communis (Hentz, 1850) ( Jennings et al., 2002; Simpson et al., 2023) . The more aggressive European species likely contributes to the decline of F. communis by taking over their webs (and perhaps consuming the original occupier) or incorporating them into its own webs. Web take-over or incorporation is a typical behaviour of L. triangularis. Moreover, F. communis avoids areas inhabited by L. triangularis and abandons its webs when L. triangularis is introduced on its territory ( Bednarski et al., 2010; Houser et al., 2014).
Linyphia triangularis builds sheet web in segments over many days. This consists of a supporting structure and a meshwork of fibres of varying thickness ( Benjamin et al., 2002; Benjamin & Zschokke, 2004). The web is typically suspended among vegetation, up to six metres above ground and the spider resides on the underside awaiting prey ( Bee et al., 2017).
Linyphia triangularis has an annual life cycle. It reaches maturity in July to August and adults occur until September to October. The males mature a few days earlier and leave their webs in search of females. Near-mature females can be guarded by males for several days and copulation occurs immediately after female’s final moult. If more than one male is present on the web, they fight till one of them retreats or dies and the remining male copulates with the female. The copulation can also be interrupted by the arrival of another male or other disturbance in which case a female will retreat to the edge of the web. She can mate for a second time and potentially produce offspring from two males. Detailed descriptions of courtship and copulation of L. triangularis was provided by Rovner (1968), Toft (1989), Nielsen and Toft (1990), Stumpf (1990), Schulz and Toft (1993), Weldingh et al. (2011). The eggs are laid in October, into a sac in which they overwinter ( Stumpf, 1990).
The phylogeny of Linyphyiidae has been researched in number of studies using morphological and/or molecular data ( Arnedo et al., 2009; Gavish-Regev et al., 2013; Hormiga, 2000; Hormiga & Scharff, 2005; Miller & Hormiga, 2004; Tu & Hormiga, 2011; Wang et al., 2015). The genus Linyphia Latreille, 1804 is monophyletic according to Arnedo et al. (2009). The family was recovered as monophyletic by Arnedo et al. (2009), but not by Wang et al. (2015). Within Linyphiidae seven well supported clades, inconsistent with the seven currently recognized subfamilies, and four unstable branches have been recovered by Wang et al. (2015). After removing the unstable branches, the remining Linyphiidae were recovered as monophyletic ( Wang et al., 2015). The further work is needed to resolve phylogenetic relationships within Linyphyiidae.
The high-quality genome of L. triangularis presented here will aid research into the phylogeny and taxonomy of the Linyphyiidae. It was sequenced from specimen collected on 29/07/2021 from Hartslock Nature Reserve, England by Duncan and Olga Sivell and identified by Olga Sivell following Bee et al. (2017) and Roberts (1996). The genome was sequenced as part of the Darwin Tree of Life Project, a collaborative effort to sequence all named eukaryotic species in the Atlantic Archipelago of Britain and Ireland.
Genome sequence report
Sequencing data
The genome of a specimen of Linyphia triangularis ( Figure 1) was sequenced using Pacific Biosciences single-molecule HiFi long reads, generating 82.72 Gb from 87.32 million reads. GenomeScope analysis of the PacBio HiFi data estimated the haploid genome size at 1,258.44 Mb, with a heterozygosity of 1.13% and repeat content of 37.68%. These values provide an initial assessment of genome complexity and the challenges anticipated during assembly. Based on this estimated genome size, the sequencing data provided approximately 63.0x coverage of the genome. Chromosome conformation Hi-C sequencing produced 104.61 Gb from 692.76 million reads. Table 1 summarises the specimen and sequencing information.
Photograph of the Linyphia triangularis (qqLinTria7) specimen used for genome sequencing.
Table 1.: Specimen and sequencing data for Linyphia triangularis.
Assembly statistics
The primary haplotype was assembled, and contigs corresponding to an alternate haplotype were also deposited in INSDC databases. The assembly was improved by manual curation, which corrected 47 misjoins or missing joins and removed 6 haplotypic duplications. These interventions reduced the total assembly length by 2.23%, decreased the scaffold count by 5.08%, and decreased the scaffold N50 by 0.52%. The final assembly has a total length of 1,349.10 Mb in 373 scaffolds, with 289 gaps, and a scaffold N50 of 96.46 Mb ( Table 2).
Table 2.: Genome assembly data for Linyphia triangularis.
The snail plot in Figure 2 provides a summary of the assembly statistics, indicating the distribution of scaffold lengths and other assembly metrics. Figure 3 shows the distribution of scaffolds by GC proportion and coverage. Figure 4 presents a cumulative assembly plot, with separate curves representing different scaffold subsets assigned to various phyla, illustrating the completeness of the assembly.
Genome assembly of Linyphia triangularis, qqLinTria7.1: metrics.The BlobToolKit snail plot provides an overview of assembly metrics and BUSCO gene completeness. The circumference represents the length of the whole genome sequence, and the main plot is divided into 1,000 bins around the circumference. The outermost blue tracks display the distribution of GC, AT, and N percentages across the bins. Scaffolds are arranged clockwise from longest to shortest and are depicted in dark grey. The longest scaffold is indicated by the red arc, and the deeper orange and pale orange arcs represent the N50 and N90 lengths. A light grey spiral at the centre shows the cumulative scaffold count on a logarithmic scale. A summary of complete, fragmented, duplicated, and missing BUSCO genes in the arachnida_odb10 set is presented at the top right. An interactive version of this figure is available at https://blobtoolkit.genomehubs.org/view/GCA_963978545.1/dataset/GCA_963978545.1/snail.
Genome assembly of Linyphia triangularis, qqLinTria7.1: BlobToolKit GC-coverage plot.Blob plot showing sequence coverage (vertical axis) and GC content (horizontal axis). The circles represent scaffolds, with the size proportional to scaffold length and the colour representing phylum membership. The histograms along the axes display the total length of sequences distributed across different levels of coverage and GC content. An interactive version of this figure is available at https://blobtoolkit.genomehubs.org/view/GCA_963978545.1/blob.
Genome assembly of Linyphia triangularis, qqLinTria7.1: BlobToolKit cumulative sequence plot.The grey line shows cumulative length for all scaffolds. Coloured lines show cumulative lengths of scaffolds assigned to each phylum using the buscogenes taxrule. An interactive version of this figure is available at https://blobtoolkit.genomehubs.org/view/GCA_963978545.1/dataset/GCA_963978545.1/cumulative.
Most of the assembly sequence (95.28%) was assigned to 13 chromosomal-level scaffolds, representing 11 autosomes and the X 1 and X _2 _sex chromosome. These chromosome-level scaffolds, confirmed by Hi-C data, are named according to size ( Figure 5; Table 3).
Genome assembly of Linyphia triangularis: Hi-C contact map of the qqLinTria7.1 assembly, visualised using HiGlass.Chromosomes are shown in order of size from left to right and top to bottom. An interactive version of this figure may be viewed at https://genome-note-higlass.tol.sanger.ac.uk/l/?d=I9-jz4vWT9WEgiGbqE4g8g.
Table 3.: Chromosomal pseudomolecules in the genome assembly of Linyphia triangularis, qqLinTria7.
The mitochondrial genome was also assembled. This sequence is included as a contig in the multifasta file of the genome submission and as a standalone record in GenBank.
Assembly quality metrics
The estimated Quality Value (QV) and k-mer completeness metrics, along with BUSCO completeness scores, were calculated for each haplotype and the combined assembly. The QV reflects the base-level accuracy of the assembly, while k-mer completeness indicates the proportion of expected k-mers identified in the assembly. BUSCO scores provide a measure of completeness based on benchmarking universal single-copy orthologues.
The primary haplotype has a QV of 59.5, and the combined primary and alternate assemblies achieve an estimated QV of 59.6. The k-mer completeness for the primary haplotype is 82.97%, and for the alternate haplotype it is 70.52%. The combined primary and alternate assemblies achieve a k-mer completeness of 99.10%. BUSCO analysis using the arachnida_odb10 reference set ( n = 2,934) indicated a completeness score of 96.0% (single = 90.8%, duplicated = 5.2%).
Table 2 provides assembly metric benchmarks adapted from Rhie et al. (2021) and the Earth BioGenome Project Report on Assembly Standards September 2024. The assembly achieves the EBP reference standard of 6.C.Q59.
Methods
Sample acquisition and DNA barcoding
The specimen used for genome sequencing, a male Linyphia triangularis (specimen ID NHMUK014042374, ToLID qqLinTria7), was collected from Hartslock Nature Reserve, England, United Kingdom (latitude 51.51, longitude –1.11) on 2021-07-29. The specimen used for Hi-C sequencing (specimen ID NHMUK014452495, ToLID qqLinTria9) was collected on the same occasion. The specimens were collected by Duncan Sivell and Olga Sivell (Natural History Museum), identified by Olga Sivell, and preserved by dry freezing (–80 °C).
The initial identification by morphology was verified by an additional DNA barcoding process according to the framework developed by Twyford et al. (2024). A small sample was dissected from the specimen and stored in ethanol, while the remaining parts were shipped on dry ice to the Wellcome Sanger Institute (WSI) ( Pereira et al., 2022). The tissue was lysed, the COI marker region was amplified by PCR, and amplicons were sequenced and compared to the BOLD database, confirming the species identification ( Crowley et al., 2023). Following whole genome sequence generation, the relevant DNA barcode region was also used alongside the initial barcoding data for sample tracking at the WSI ( Twyford et al., 2024). The standard operating procedures for Darwin Tree of Life barcoding have been deposited on protocols.io ( Beasley et al., 2023).
Metadata collection for samples adhered to the Darwin Tree of Life project standards described by Lawniczak et al. (2022).
Nucleic acid extraction
The workflow for high molecular weight (HMW) DNA extraction at the Wellcome Sanger Institute (WSI) Tree of Life Core Laboratory includes a sequence of procedures: sample preparation and homogenisation, DNA extraction, fragmentation and purification. Detailed protocols are available on protocols.io ( Denton et al., 2023b). The qqLinTria7 sample was prepared for DNA extraction by weighing and dissecting it on dry ice ( Jay et al., 2023). Tissue from the head and thorax was homogenised using a PowerMasher II tissue disruptor ( Denton et al., 2023a).
HMW DNA was extracted using the Automated MagAttract v2 protocol ( Oatley et al., 2023a). DNA was sheared into an average fragment size of 12–20 kb in a Megaruptor 3 system ( Bates et al., 2023). Sheared DNA was purified by solid-phase reversible immobilisation, using AMPure PB beads to eliminate shorter fragments and concentrate the DNA ( Oatley et al., 2023b). The concentration of the sheared and purified DNA was assessed using a Nanodrop spectrophotometer and Qubit Fluorometer using the Qubit dsDNA High Sensitivity Assay kit. Fragment size distribution was evaluated by running the sample on the FemtoPulse system.
Hi-C sample preparation
Tissue from the head and thorax of the qqLinTria9 sample was processed for Hi-C sequencing at the WSI Scientific Operations core, using the Arima-HiC v2 kit. In brief, 20–50 mg of frozen tissue (stored at –80 °C) was fixed, and the DNA crosslinked using a TC buffer with 22% formaldehyde concentration. After crosslinking, the tissue was homogenised using the Diagnocine Power Masher-II and BioMasher-II tubes and pestles. Following the Arima-HiC v2 kit manufacturer's instructions, crosslinked DNA was digested using a restriction enzyme master mix. The 5’-overhangs were filled in and labelled with biotinylated nucleotides and proximally ligated. An overnight incubation was carried out for enzymes to digest remaining proteins and for crosslinks to reverse. A clean up was performed with SPRIselect beads prior to library preparation. Additionally, the biotinylation percentage was estimated using the Qubit Fluorometer v4.0 (Thermo Fisher Scientific) and Qubit HS Assay Kit and Arima-HiC v2 QC beads.
Library preparation and sequencing
Library preparation and sequencing were performed at the WSI Scientific Operations core.
PacBio HiFi *
At a minimum, samples were required to have an average fragment size exceeding 8 kb and a total mass over 400 ng to proceed to the low input SMRTbell Prep Kit 3.0 protocol (Pacific Biosciences, California, USA), depending on genome size and sequencing depth required. Libraries were prepared using the SMRTbell Prep Kit 3.0 (Pacific Biosciences, California, USA) as per the manufacturer's instructions. The kit includes the reagents required for end repair/A-tailing, adapter ligation, post-ligation SMRTbell bead cleanup, and nuclease treatment. Following the manufacturer’s instructions, size selection and clean up was carried out using diluted AMPure PB beads (Pacific Biosciences, California, USA). DNA concentration was quantified using the Qubit Fluorometer v4.0 (Thermo Fisher Scientific) with Qubit 1X dsDNA HS assay kit and the final library fragment size analysis was carried out using the Agilent Femto Pulse Automated Pulsed Field CE Instrument (Agilent Technologies) and gDNA 55kb BAC analysis kit.
Samples were sequenced on a Revio instrument (Pacific Biosciences, California, USA). Prepared libraries were normalised to 2 nM, and 15 μL was used for making complexes. Primers were annealed and polymerases were hybridised to create circularised complexes according to manufacturer’s instructions. The complexes were purified with the 1.2X clean up with SMRTbell beads. The purified complexes were then diluted to the Revio loading concentration (in the range 200–300 pM), and spiked with a Revio sequencing internal control. Samples were sequenced on Revio 25M SMRT cells (Pacific Biosciences, California, USA). The SMRT link software, a PacBio web-based end-to-end workflow manager, was used to set-up and monitor the run, as well as perform primary and secondary analysis of the data upon completion.
Hi-C *
For Hi-C library preparation, DNA was fragmented using the Covaris E220 sonicator (Covaris) and size selected using SPRISelect beads to 400 to 600 bp. The DNA was then enriched using the Arima-HiC v2 kit Enrichment beads. Using the NEBNext Ultra II DNA Library Prep Kit (New England Biolabs) for end repair, a-tailing, and adapter ligation. This uses a custom protocol which resembles the standard NEBNext Ultra II DNA Library Prep protocol but where library preparation occurs while DNA is bound to the Enrichment beads. For library amplification, 10 to 16 PCR cycles were required, determined by the sample biotinylation percentage. The Hi-C sequencing was performed using paired-end sequencing with a read length of 150 bp on an Illumina NovaSeq 6000 instrument.
Genome assembly, curation and evaluation
Assembly *
Prior to assembly of the PacBio HiFi reads, a database of k-mer counts ( k = 31) was generated from the filtered reads using FastK. GenomeScope2 ( Ranallo-Benavidez et al., 2020) was used to analyse the k-mer frequency distributions, providing estimates of genome size, heterozygosity, and repeat content.
The HiFi reads were first assembled using Hifiasm ( Cheng et al., 2021) with the --primary option. Haplotypic duplications were identified and removed using purge_dups ( Guan et al., 2020). The Hi-C reads were mapped to the primary contigs using bwa-mem2 ( Vasimuddin et al., 2019). The contigs were further scaffolded using the provided Hi-C data ( Rao et al., 2014) in YaHS ( Zhou et al., 2023) using the --break option for handling potential misassemblies. The scaffolded assemblies were evaluated using Gfastats ( Formenti et al., 2022), BUSCO ( Manni et al., 2021) and MERQURY.FK ( Rhie et al., 2020).
The mitochondrial genome was assembled using MitoHiFi ( Uliano-Silva et al., 2023), which runs MitoFinder ( Allio et al., 2020) and uses these annotations to select the final mitochondrial contig and to ensure the general quality of the sequence.
Assembly curation *
The assembly was decontaminated using the Assembly Screen for Cobionts and Contaminants (ASCC) pipeline (article in preparation). Flat files and maps used in curation were generated in TreeVal ( Pointon et al., 2023). Manual curation was primarily conducted using PretextView ( Harry, 2022), with additional insights provided by JBrowse2 ( Diesh et al., 2023) and HiGlass ( Kerpedjiev et al., 2018). Scaffolds were visually inspected and corrected as described by Howe et al. (2021). Any identified contamination, missed joins, and mis-joins were corrected, and duplicate sequences were tagged and removed. The curation process is documented at https://gitlab.com/wtsi-grit/rapid-curation (article in preparation).
Assembly quality assessment *
The Merqury.FK tool ( Rhie et al., 2020), run in a Singularity container ( Kurtzer et al., 2017), was used to evaluate k-mer completeness and assembly quality for the primary and alternate haplotypes using the k-mer databases ( k = 31) that were computed prior to genome assembly. The analysis outputs included assembly QV scores and completeness statistics.
A Hi-C contact map was produced for the final version of the assembly. The Hi-C reads were aligned using bwa-mem2 ( Vasimuddin et al., 2019) and the alignment files were combined using SAMtools ( Danecek et al., 2021). The Hi-C alignments were converted into a contact map using BEDTools ( Quinlan & Hall, 2010) and the Cooler tool suite ( Abdennur & Mirny, 2020). The contact map was visualised in HiGlass ( Kerpedjiev et al., 2018).
The blobtoolkit pipeline is a Nextflow port of the previous Snakemake Blobtoolkit pipeline ( Challis et al., 2020). It aligns the PacBio reads in SAMtools and minimap2 ( Li, 2018) and generates coverage tracks for regions of fixed size. In parallel, it queries the GoaT database ( Challis et al., 2023) to identify all matching BUSCO lineages to run BUSCO ( Manni et al., 2021). For the three domain-level BUSCO lineages, the pipeline aligns the BUSCO genes to the UniProt Reference Proteomes database ( Bateman et al., 2023) with DIAMOND blastp ( Buchfink et al., 2021). The genome is also divided into chunks according to the density of the BUSCO genes from the closest taxonomic lineage, and each chunk is aligned to the UniProt Reference Proteomes database using DIAMOND blastx. Genome sequences without a hit are chunked using seqtk and aligned to the NT database with blastn ( Altschul et al., 1990). The blobtools suite combines all these outputs into a blobdir for visualisation.
The blobtoolkit pipeline was developed using nf-core tooling ( Ewels et al., 2020) and MultiQC ( Ewels et al., 2016), relying on the Conda package manager, the Bioconda initiative ( Grüning et al., 2018), the Biocontainers infrastructure ( da Veiga Leprevost et al., 2017), as well as the Docker ( Merkel, 2014) and Singularity ( Kurtzer et al., 2017) containerisation solutions.
Table 4 contains a list of relevant software tool versions and sources.
Wellcome Sanger Institute – Legal and Governance
The materials that have contributed to this genome note have been supplied by a Darwin Tree of Life Partner. The submission of materials by a Darwin Tree of Life Partner is subject to the ‘Darwin Tree of Life Project Sampling Code of Practice’, which can be found in full on the Darwin Tree of Life website here. By agreeing with and signing up to the Sampling Code of Practice, the Darwin Tree of Life Partner agrees they will meet the legal and ethical requirements and standards set out within this document in respect of all samples acquired for, and supplied to, the Darwin Tree of Life Project.
Further, the Wellcome Sanger Institute employs a process whereby due diligence is carried out proportionate to the nature of the materials themselves, and the circumstances under which they have been/are to be collected and provided for use. The purpose of this is to address and mitigate any potential legal and/or ethical implications of receipt and use of the materials as part of the research project, and to ensure that in doing so we align with best practice wherever possible. The overarching areas of consideration are:
• Ethical review of provenance and sourcing of the material
• Legality of collection, transfer and use (national and international)
Each transfer of samples is further undertaken according to a Research Collaboration Agreement or Material Transfer Agreement entered into by the Darwin Tree of Life Partner, Genome Research Limited (operating as the Wellcome Sanger Institute), and in some circumstances other Darwin Tree of Life collaborators.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1Abdennur N Mirny LA : Cooler: scalable storage for Hi-C data and other genomically labeled arrays. Bioinformatics. 2020;36(1):311–316. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btz 540 31290943 PMC 8205516 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 2Allio R Schomaker-Bastos A Romiguier J : Mito Finder: efficient automated large-scale extraction of mitogenomic data in target enrichment phylogenomics. Mol Ecol Resour. 2020;20(4):892–905. 10.1111/1755-0998.13160 32243090 PMC 7497042 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 3Altschul SF Gish W Miller W : Basic local alignment search tool. J Mol Biol. 1990;215(3):403–410. 10.1016/S 0022-2836(05)80360-2 2231712 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 4Arnedo MA Hormiga G Scharff N : Higher‐level phylogenetics of linyphiid spiders (Araneae, Linyphiidae) based on morphological and molecular evidence. Cladistics. 2009;25(3):231–262. 10.1111/j.1096-0031.2009.00249.x 34879614 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 5Bateman A Martin MJ Orchard S : Uni Prot: the universal protein knowledgebase in 2023. Nucleic Acids Res. 2023;51(D 1):D 523–D 531. 10.1093/nar/gkac 1052 36408920 PMC 9825514 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 6Bates A Clayton-Lucey I Howard C : Sanger Tree of Life HMW DNA fragmentation: diagenode Megaruptor ®3 for LI Pac Bio. protocols.io. 2023. 10.17504/protocols.io.81wgbxzq 3lpk/v 1 · doi ↗
- 7Beasley J Uhl R Forrest LL : DNA barcoding SO Ps for the Darwin Tree of Life project. protocols.io. 2023; [Accessed 25 June 2024]. 10.17504/protocols.io.261ged 91jv 47/v 1 · doi ↗
- 8Bednarski J Ginsberg H Jakob EM : Competitive interactions between a native spider ( Frontinella communis, Araneae: Linyphiidae) and an invasive spider ( Linyphia triangularis, Araneae: Linyphiidae). Biol Invasions. 2010;12:905–912. 10.1007/s 10530-009-9511-7 · doi ↗