Search

The quality of genome assemblies has improved rapidly in recent years due to continual advances in sequencing technology, assembly approaches, and quality control. In the field of molecular ecology, this has led to the development of exceptional quality genome assemblies that will be important long-term resources for broader studies into ecological, conservation, evolutionary, and population genomics of naturally occurring species. Moreover, the extent to which a single reference genome represents the diversity within a species varies: pan-genomes will become increasingly important ecological genomics resources, particularly in systems found to have considerable presence-absence variation in their functional content. Here, we highlight advances in technology that have raised the bar for genome assembly and provide guidance on standards to achieve exceptional quality reference genomes. Key recommendations include the following: (a) Genome assemblies should include long-read sequencing except in rare cases where it is effectively impossible to acquire adequately preserved samples needed for high molecular weight DNA standards. (b) At least one scaffolding approach should be included with genome assembly such as Hi-C or optical mapping. (c) Genome assemblies should be carefully evaluated, this may involve utilising short read data for genome polishing, error correction, k-mer analyses, and estimating the percent of reads that map back to an assembly. Finally, a genome assembly is most valuable if all data and methods are made publicly available and the utility of a genome for further studies is verified through examples. While these recommendations are based on current technology, we anticipate that future advances will push the field further and the molecular ecology community should continue to adopt new approaches that attain the highest quality genome assemblies.

Two recent articles were written in response to our paper "Breaking RAD: An evaluation of the utility of restriction site associated DNA sequencing scans of adaptation." While we agree with some of the comments made by the authors of these two response papers, we still believe caution should be employed in RADseq studies that aim to detect loci that contribute to adaptation. In this rebuttal, we evaluate the key points made in these papers, attempt to identify a middle ground and make suggestions for responsibly conducting future studies to understand the genomewide mechanisms of adaptation.