The genome sequence of a cluster fly, Pollenia pediculata Macquart, 1834
Steven Falk, Liam M. Crowley, Olga Sivell, Panagiotis Ioannidis, Arun Arumugaperumal
TL;DR
This paper presents the genome sequence of the cluster fly Pollenia pediculata, including two haplotypes and the mitochondrial genome.
Contribution
The study provides a detailed genome assembly of Pollenia pediculata, including chromosomal pseudomolecules and mitochondrial DNA.
Findings
The genome assembly includes two haplotypes with total lengths of 1,156.86 and 1,222.48 megabases.
Haplotype 1 is scaffolded into 6 chromosomal pseudomolecules covering 99.79% of its sequence.
The mitochondrial genome is assembled with a length of 15.82 kilobases.
Abstract
We present a genome assembly from a female specimen of Pollenia pediculata (cluster fly; Arthropoda; Insecta; Diptera; Polleniidae). The assembly contains two haplotypes with total lengths of 1,156.86 megabases and 1,222.48 megabases. Most of haplotype 1 (99.79%) is scaffolded into 6 chromosomal pseudomolecules. Haplotype 2 was assembled to scaffold level. The mitochondrial genome has also been assembled, with a length of 15.82 kilobases.
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 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
|
| Pollenia pediculata (tufted clusterfly) | ||
|
| PRJEB81200 | ||
|
|
| ||
|
| SAMEA113425778 | ||
|
| 1266492 | ||
| Specimen information | |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| idPolPedi2 | SAMEA113425962 | whole organism |
|
| idPolPedi1 | SAMEA113425504 | head and thorax |
| Sequencing information | |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ERR13802793 | 8.06e+08 | 121.69 |
|
| ERR13800662 | 3.99e+06 | 41.14 |
| Genome assembly | Haplotype 1 | Haplotype 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Assembly name | idPolPedi2.hap1.1 | idPolPedi2.hap2.1 |
| Assembly accession | GCA_964300415.1 | GCA_964300425.1 |
| Assembly level | chromosome | scaffold |
| Span (Mb) | 1,156.86 | 1,222.48 |
| Number of contigs | 201 | 1,891 |
| Number of scaffolds | 49 | 1,187 |
| Longest scaffold (Mb) | 275.31 | - |
| Assembly metrics
| Haplotype 1 | Haplotype 2 |
| Contig N50 length (≥ 1 Mb) | 12.4 Mb | 3.31 Mb |
| Scaffold N50 length
| 221.33 Mb | 216.64 Mb |
| Consensus quality (QV) (≥ 40) | 65.3 | 63.5 |
|
| 71.32% | 71.49% |
| Combined
| 98.64% | |
| BUSCO**
| C:99.0%[S:98.6%,D:0.4%],
| C:99.1%[S:97.8%,D:1.2%],
|
| Percentage of assembly mapped to
| 99.79% | - |
| Sex chromosomes (localised
| Not identified | - |
| Organelles (one complete allele) | Mitochondrial genome: 15.82 kb | - |
| INSDC
| Name | Length
| GC% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 275.31 | 31 | |
| 2 | 221.39 | 31 | |
| 3 | 221.33 | 31 | |
| 4 | 215.71 | 31 | |
| 5 | 196.12 | 31 | |
| 6 | 24.52 | 31.5 | |
| MT | 0.02 | 22.5 |
| Software tool | Version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| BLAST | 2.14.0 |
|
| BlobToolKit | 4.3.9 |
|
| BUSCO | 5.5.0 |
|
| bwa-mem2 | 2.2.1 |
|
| DIAMOND | 2.1.8 |
|
| fasta_windows | 0.2.4 |
|
| FastK | 666652151335353eef2fcd58880bcef5bc2928e1 |
|
| Gfastats | 1.3.6 |
|
| GoaT CLI | 0.2.5 |
|
| Hifiasm | 0.19.8-r603 |
|
| HiGlass | 44086069ee7d4d3f6f3f0012569789ec138f42b84a
|
|
| MerquryFK | d00d98157618f4e8d1a9190026b19b471055b22e |
|
| Minimap2 | 2.24-r1122 |
|
| MitoHiFi | 3 |
|
| MultiQC | 1.14, 1.17, and 1.18 |
|
| Nextflow | 23.10.0 |
|
| PretextView | 0.2.5 |
|
| samtools | 1.19.2 |
|
| sanger-tol/ascc | - |
|
| sanger-tol/
| 0.6.0 |
|
| 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
TopicsInsect symbiosis and bacterial influences · Environmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies · Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
Species taxonomy
Eukaryota; Opisthokonta; Metazoa; Eumetazoa; Bilateria; Protostomia; Ecdysozoa; Panarthropoda; Arthropoda; Mandibulata; Pancrustacea; Hexapoda; Insecta; Dicondylia; Pterygota; Neoptera; Endopterygota; Diptera; Brachycera; Muscomorpha; Eremoneura; Cyclorrhapha; Schizophora; Calyptratae; Oestroidea; Polleniidae; Pollenia; Pollenia pediculata Macquart, 1834 (NCBI:txid1266492)
Background
Pollenia pediculata Macquart, 1834 is a species from the family Polleniidae. It was previously included in Calliphoridae as the subfamily Polleniinae ( Rognes, 1991a; van Emden, 1954), but was recently raised to family status ( Cerretti et al., 2019; Kutty et al., 2019; Yan et al., 2021). Pollenia Robineau-Desvoidy 1830 is the only genus from this family occurring in Britain ( Chandler, 2024; Gisondi et al., 2020; Sivell, 2021). They are easily distinguished by golden crinkly hairs covering the thorax ( Draber-Mońko, 2004; Rognes, 1991a; Sivell, 2021; van Emden, 1954). P. pediculata is a fairly dark species, with a yellow basicosta and black palps. It can be easily identified by the tuft of pale hairs on the node at the junction of the subcostal (Sc) and humeral (h) veins on the ventral side of the wing ( Draber-Mońko, 2004; Rognes, 1991a; Sivell, 2021).
Pollenia pediculata is widely distributed in the Palaearctic, it also occurs in India and Pakistan and has been introduced into the Nearctic (Canada and USA), Afrotropical (South Africa), Neotropical (Bahamas) and Australasian (New Zealand) Regions ( Draber-Mońko, 2004; Gisondi et al., 2020; Rognes, 1987; Rognes, 1991a). It is widespread in Europe and common in Britain ( van Emden, 1954; Rognes, 1991a; Draber-Mońko, 2004; Sivell, 2021; Gisondi et al., 2020).
Pollenia pediculata is oviparous and the larvae of this species are parasitoids of the earthworm Eisenia rosea (Savigny, 1826) ( Rognes, 1991a). According to Rognes (1987), the larvae described by Yahnke and George (1972) were most likely P. pendiculata and not P. rudis. The puparium of P. pediculata was described by Rognes (1987). The egg was described by Grzywacz et al. (2012) and the first instar larva was described by Szpila (2003). The adults feed on flowers and are important pollinators, they are also attracted to fish bait and can be found feeding on carrion, although they do not breed in it ( Jewiss-Gaines et al., 2012; Marshall, 2012; Martin-Vega & Baz, 2013; Rognes, 1991a; Szpila, 2017). Pollenia overwinter as adults and can cause a nuisance when aggregating indoors in large numbers. This behaviour has earned them the common name of cluster flies.
The phylogeny of Pollenia has been studied by Rognes ( 1987, 1988, 1991a, 1991b, 1992a, 1992b, 2010) who proposed a number of species groups based on morphology. Rognes (1987) placed P. pediculata (as P. pseudorudis Rognes, 1985) in the rudis species group together with P. angustigena Wainwright, 1940, P. hungarica Rognes, 1987, P. longitheca Rognes, 1987, P. luteovillosa Rognes, 1987 and P. rudis (Fabricius, 1794). A molecular study by Szpila et al. (2023) showed high phylogenetic support for the rudis species group. This study also expressed the need for testing the phylogenetic hypotheses using new-generation sequencing ( Szpila et al., 2023). The high-quality genome of P. pediculata presented here as well as other Pollenia genomes sequenced as part of the Darwin Tree of Life Project ( Falk et al., 2023a; Falk et al., 2023b; Falk et al., 2024; Sivell et al., 2025) will aid this research.
The high-quality genome of Pollenia pediculata was sequenced from a single specimen from Wytham Woods, Oxford, England. 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 Pollenia pediculata ( Figure 1) was sequenced using Pacific Biosciences single-molecule HiFi long reads, generating 41.14 Gb (gigabases) from 3.99 million reads. GenomeScope analysis of the PacBio HiFi data estimated the haploid genome size at 1,074.95 Mb, with a heterozygosity of 1.75% and repeat content of 50.91%. 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 36.0x coverage of the genome. Chromosome conformation Hi-C sequencing produced 121.69 Gb from 805.91 million reads. Table 1 summarises the specimen and sequencing information.
Photograph of the Pollenia pediculata (idPolPedi2) specimen used for genome sequencing.
Table 1.: Specimen and sequencing data for Pollenia pediculata.
Assembly statistics
The genome was assembled into two haplotypes using Hi-C phasing. Haplotype 1 was curated to chromosome level, while haplotype 2 was assembled to scaffold level. The assembly was improved by manual curation, which corrected 79 misjoins or missing joins. These interventions decreased the scaffold count by 13.79%. The final assembly has a total length of 1,156.86 Mb in 49 scaffolds, with 152 gaps, and a scaffold N50 of 221.33 Mb ( Table 2).
Table 2.: Genome assembly data for Pollenia pediculata.
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 Pollenia pediculata, idPolPedi2.hap1.1: 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 set is presented at the top right. An interactive version of this figure is available at https://blobtoolkit.genomehubs.org/view/GCA_964300415.1/dataset/GCA_964300415.1/snail.
Genome assembly of Pollenia pediculata, idPolPedi2.hap1.1: 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_964300415.1/dataset/GCA_964300415.1/blob.
Genome assembly of Pollenia pediculata, idPolPedi2.hap1.1: 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_964300415.1/dataset/GCA_964300415.1/cumulative.
Most of the assembly sequence (99.79%) was assigned to 6 chromosomal-level scaffolds. These chromosome-level scaffolds, confirmed by Hi-C data, are named according to size ( Figure 5; Table 3).
Genome assembly of Pollenia pediculata, idPolPedi2.hap1.1: Hi-C contact map of the idPolPedi2.hap1.1 assembly, produced in PretextView.Chromosomes are shown in order of size from left to right and top to bottom.
Table 3.: Chromosomal pseudomolecules in the genome assembly of Pollenia pediculata, idPolPedi2.
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.
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.
For haplotype 1, the estimated QV is 65.3, and for haplotype 2, 63.5. When the two haplotypes are combined, the assembly achieves an estimated QV of 64.3. The k-mer recovery for haplotype 1 is 71.32%, and for haplotype 2 71.49%, while the combined haplotypes have a k-mer recovery of 98.64%. BUSCO v.5.5.0 analysis using the diptera_odb10 reference set ( n = 3,285) identified 99.0% of the expected gene set (single = 98.6%, duplicated = 0.4%) for haplotype 1.
Table 2 provides assembly metric benchmarks adapted from Rhie et al. (2021) and the Earth BioGenome Project (EBP) Report on Assembly Standards September 2024. The assembly achieves the EBP reference standard of 7.C.Q63.
Methods
Sample acquisition and DNA barcoding
An adult female Pollenia pediculata (specimen ID Ox003209, ToLID idPolPedi2) was collected from Wytham Woods, Oxfordshire, United Kingdom (latitude 51.76, longitude –1.34) on 2022-10-03 by netting. The specimen used for Hi-C sequencing (specimen ID Ox002743, ToLID idPolPedi1) was collected from the same location on 2022-06-14 by netting. The specimens were collected by Steven Falk and Liam Crowley, identified by Steven Falk and preserved on dry ice.
The initial identification was verified by an additional DNA barcoding process according to the framework developed by Twyford et al. (2024). A small sample was dissected from each 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 idPolPedi2 sample was prepared for DNA extraction by weighing and dissecting it on dry ice ( Jay et al., 2023). Tissue from the whole organism was homogenised using a PowerMasher II tissue disruptor ( Denton et al., 2023a). HMW DNA was extracted in the WSI Scientific Operations core using the Automated MagAttract v2 protocol ( Oatley et al., 2023). The 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 ( Strickland et al., 2023). 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 idPolPedi1 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 assembled using Hifiasm in Hi-C phasing mode ( Cheng et al., 2021; Cheng et al., 2022), resulting in a pair of haplotype-resolved assemblies. The Hi-C reads ( Rao et al., 2014) were mapped to the primary contigs using bwa-mem2 ( Vasimuddin et al., 2019). The contigs were further scaffolded using the provided Hi-C datain 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. Flat files and maps used in curation were generated via the TreeVal pipeline ( Pointon et al., 2023). Manual curation was conducted primarily in PretextView ( Harry, 2022) and HiGlass ( Kerpedjiev et al., 2018), with additional insights provided by JBrowse2 ( Diesh et al., 2023). Scaffolds were visually inspected and corrected as described by Howe et al. (2021). Any identified contamination, missed joins, and mis-joins were amended, and duplicate sequences were tagged and removed. The curation process is documented at https://gitlab.com/wtsi-grit/rapid-curation.
** 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 both haplotypes using the k-mer databases ( k = 31) computed prior to genome assembly. The analysis outputs included assembly QV scores and completeness statistics.
The blobtoolkit pipeline is a Nextflow ( Di Tommaso et al., 2017) 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.
- 1Allio 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 ↗
- 2Altschul 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 ↗
- 3Bateman 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 ↗
- 4Bates 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 ↗
- 5Beasley 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 ↗
- 6Buchfink B Reuter K Drost HG : Sensitive protein alignments at Tree-of-Life scale using DIAMOND. Nat Methods. 2021;18(4):366–368. 10.1038/s 41592-021-01101-x 33828273 PMC 8026399 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 7Cerretti P Stireman JO Badano D : Reclustering the cluster flies (Diptera: Oestroidea, Polleniidae). Syst Entomol. 2019;44(4):957–972. 10.1111/syen.12369 · doi ↗
- 8Challis R Kumar S Sotero-Caio C : Genomes on a Tree (Goa T): a versatile, scalable search engine for genomic and sequencing project metadata across the eukaryotic Tree of Life [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]. Wellcome Open Res. 2023;8:24. 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.18658.1 36864925 PMC 9971660 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗