Exact(4)
Manual curation of the mapped reads suggests this supercontig to be either a repeating unit or a circular sequence of 5846 bp with no known genomic loci.
We assembled the plastid genome of C. palmata (GenBank accession number NC026786.1; fig. 1) as a circular sequence of 158,545 bp, with an average of approximately 734.5× coverage from approximately 21.24 million paired-end reads.
These 24 contigs were subsequently concatenated into 3 contigs with SSPACE version 2.0 (Boetzer et al. 2011), which were then assembled into a circular sequence of 657,101 bp using reads from a mate-pair library with ∼4,100 bp inserts sequenced on an Illumina HiSeq2000 and several GapFiller iterations (Boetzer and Pirovano 2012).
The chloroplast genome of Roya was reconstructed as a circular sequence of 138,275 bp in length (fig. 1 C, NCBI GenBank accession number KJ461682), making it the shortest of the four zygnematophycean chloroplast genomes sequenced so far (including Mesotaenium here).
Similar(56)
We assembled S. densiflora as a circular sequence with a predicted minimum length of 21,485 bp, and an average of approximately 50× coverage (GenBank accession number KR902497.1; fig. 2) from approximately 17.03 million paired-end reads.
Using this information, one can represent a genome as a collection of chromosomes, each of which is a linear or circular sequence of gene identifiers.
This program analyzed the genome as a circular sequence.
The start and the end of this contig showed significant overlap and represented the complete, circular sequence of the pEC_Bactec plasmid.
The start and the end of the 74322-bp contig showed significant overlap and represented the complete, circular sequence of the pEC_B24 plasmid.
For this case, we treat every point as the starting point in this circular sequence of length n, and then we get n linear single-strand genomes.
In this case, we treat every point as the start point in this circular sequence of length n, and then we get n linear single-strand genomes.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com