Composite Genome Quality Index for Pathogenic Bacterial Genomes

High-quality bacterial genomes are essential for robust comparative genomics, reliable taxonomic assignment, and accurate pathogen and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) surveillance. Yet, public repositories still contain highly heterogeneous assemblies, and genome quality is often judged using single metrics in isolation. Here we develop an integrative Genome Quality Index (GQI) that combines four complementary metrics—including BUSCO single-copy completeness, contig number, N50, and unmapped read percentage—into a composite, interpretable score. We re-assembled and evaluated 474 pathogenic bacterial genomes submitted from South Korea using a standardized Illumina-based pipeline and validated the framework on an independent Enterobacteriaceae dataset (n = 5781). Species-level analyses and unsupervised clustering revealed pronounced variation in genome quality (one-way ANOVA, p < 1.05 × 10−33), with Cronobacter sakazakii and Listeria monocytogenes showing consistently high GQI scores, whereas Mycobacterium tuberculosis exhibited broad variability, including clear low-quality outliers. After log-transforming skewed variables, contig count and N50 remained strongly negatively correlated (r = −0.83), while BUSCO completeness showed moderate positive association with N50 and negative association with unmapped reads. GQI scores spanned 0.23–0.96, with most genomes clustering between 0.70 and 0.85. A Random Forest classifier trained on the four raw metrics predicted GQI-based quality tiers (low, medium, high) with 97% accuracy. From the top-decile genomes, we derived empirical thresholds like BUSCO ≥ 98.6%, contigs ≤ 30, N50 ≥ 1 Mb, and unmapped reads ≤ 0.82% that refine existing recommendations and provide actionable curation criteria. Our framework complements tools such as CheckM, gVolante, and Hybracter by offering a platform-agnostic composite scoring system that can be integrated into submission workflows and surveillance pipelines to systematically flag low-quality genomes and improve the reliability of microbial genomics.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Applied Microbiology
Published
2025-12-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/applmicrobiol5040144
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.81
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Composite Genome Quality Index for Pathogenic Bacterial Genomes

Adeel Farooq, Asma Rafique
1 citations
Applied Microbiology
Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
0.81
article

Composite Genome Quality Index for Pathogenic Bacterial Genomes

Adeel Farooq, Asma Rafique
article en
1 citations

Abstract

High-quality bacterial genomes are essential for robust comparative genomics, reliable taxonomic assignment, and accurate pathogen and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) surveillance. Yet, public repositories still contain highly heterogeneous assemblies, and genome quality is often judged using single metrics in isolation. Here we develop an integrative Genome Quality Index (GQI) that combines four complementary metrics—including BUSCO single-copy completeness, contig number, N50, and unmapped read percentage—into a composite, interpretable score. We re-assembled and evaluated 474 pathogenic bacterial genomes submitted from South Korea using a standardized Illumina-based pipeline and validated the framework on an independent Enterobacteriaceae dataset (n = 5781). Species-level analyses and unsupervised clustering revealed pronounced variation in genome quality (one-way ANOVA, p < 1.05 × 10−33), with Cronobacter sakazakii and Listeria monocytogenes showing consistently high GQI scores, whereas Mycobacterium tuberculosis exhibited broad variability, including clear low-quality outliers. After log-transforming skewed variables, contig count and N50 remained strongly negatively correlated (r = −0.83), while BUSCO completeness showed moderate positive association with N50 and negative association with unmapped reads. GQI scores spanned 0.23–0.96, with most genomes clustering between 0.70 and 0.85. A Random Forest classifier trained on the four raw metrics predicted GQI-based quality tiers (low, medium, high) with 97% accuracy. From the top-decile genomes, we derived empirical thresholds like BUSCO ≥ 98.6%, contigs ≤ 30, N50 ≥ 1 Mb, and unmapped reads ≤ 0.82% that refine existing recommendations and provide actionable curation criteria. Our framework complements tools such as CheckM, gVolante, and Hybracter by offering a platform-agnostic composite scoring system that can be integrated into submission workflows and surveillance pipelines to systematically flag low-quality genomes and improve the reliability of microbial genomics.

Applied MicrobiologyVol. 5(4)
University of Guelph (CA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 21%
Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
0.81
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.