Wellcome Open ResWellcome Open Research2398-502XF1000 Research LimitedLondon, UK10.12688/wellcomeopenres.18330.1Data NoteArticlesThe genome sequence of the Adonis blue,
Lysandra bellargus (Rottemburg, 1775)
[version 1; peer review: 2 approved, 2 approved with reservations]
LohseKonradInvestigationResourcesWriting – Review & Editinghttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-9918-058X1HaywardAlexInvestigationResourcesWriting – Review & Editing2VilaRogerInvestigationWriting – Review & Editinghttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-2447-43883Wellcome Sanger Institute Tree of Life programmeWellcome Sanger Institute Scientific Operations: DNA Pipelines collectiveTree of Life Core Informatics collectiveHoweCaitlinWriting – Original Draft Preparationhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-2416-86474Darwin Tree of Life Consortiuma
Institute of Evolutionary Biology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
College of Life and Environmental Sciences, Department of Biosciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
Institut de Biologia Evolutiva, CSIC - Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain
Independent researcher, Cambridge, UKmark.blaxter@sanger.ac.uk
We present a genome assembly from an individual female
Lysandra bellargus (the Adonis blue; Arthropoda; Insecta; Lepidoptera; Lycaenidae). The genome sequence is 529 megabases in span. The majority of the assembly (99.93%) is scaffolded into 46 chromosomal pseudomolecules with the W and Z sex chromosomes assembled. The complete mitochondrial genome was also assembled and is 15.6 kilobases in length. Gene annotation of this assembly on Ensembl has identified 13,249 protein coding genes.
Lysandra bellargusAdonis bluegenome sequencechromosomalLepidopteraEuropean Research CouncilModelGenomLand757648Wellcome Trust218328Wellcome Trust206194Spanish governmentPID2019-107078GB-I00/MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilBB/N020146/1NERCNE/L011522/1This work was supported by Wellcome through core funding to the Wellcome Sanger Institute (206194) and the Darwin Tree of Life Discretionary Award (218328). KL and DL are supported by an ERC grant (ModelGenom Land 757648). KL was also supported by a NERC fellowship (NE/L011522/1). AH is supported by a Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) David Phillips Fellowship (BB/N020146/1). RV was supported by the Spanish government through grant PID2019-107078GB-I00/ MCIN/AEI/ 10.13039/501100011033.The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.Species taxonomy
The Adonis blue,
Lysandra bellargus (Rottemburg, 1775), is a butterfly belonging to the gossamer-wing butterfly family Lycaenidae. It inhabits the western Palearctic region, being found most commonly in southern and central Europe, western Russia, Turkey, Transcaucasia, Caucasus, north Iraq and Iran. Its presence has been confirmed in northern Morocco and found occasionally as far north as southern Sweden (
Raper, 2021). While
L. bellargus is listed as a species of Least Concern on the IUCN Red List of Europe (
van Swaay
et al., 2010), it is considered a vulnerable species in the UK (
Fox
et al., 2022). Within the UK, the Adonis blue is at its northern range limit and exists primarily in southern counties, such as Dorset, Wiltshire, Kent, Sussex and Surrey, as well as the Isle of Wight. Populations in the UK have been in general decline since the 1950s (
Thomas, 1983) and were severely reduced in the late 1970s after a drought caused widespread damage to the host plant (
Harper
et al., 2003). However, there is evidence of colonies of less than 50 individuals recovering to populations of 60,000 over five years (
Bourn
et al., 1998).
The Adonis blue is bivoltine, prefers calcareous grassland in sheltered, warm conditions and lays its eggs on horseshoe vetch (
Hippocrepis comosa). The Adonis blue is named after the sky-blue wings of the males, which are surrounded by a black rim with a white margin. The female is chocolate brown with a small number of blue scales near the base of the wings (
Still, 1996). The caterpillar is dark green with spines and has yellow stripes lining its back and sides (
Carter & Hargreaves, 1986).
The karyotype of the Adonis blue is unusual in that it has 45 chromosomes, while most butterflies in Lycaenidae have a conserved haploid chromosome number of either 23 or 24 (
Lorkovic, 1990). The genome sequence will offer further insight into lepidopteran genome evolution.
Genome sequence report
The genome was sequenced from a single female
L. bellargus collected from El Brull, Catalunya, Spain (
Figure 1). A total of 52-fold coverage of Pacific Biosciences single-molecule HiFi long reads and 65-fold coverage of 10X Genomics read clouds were generated. Primary assembly contigs were scaffolded with chromosome conformation Hi-C data. Manual assembly curation corrected 207 missing/misjoins and removed 13 haplotypic duplications, reducing the assembly size by 0.53% and the scaffold number by 47.35%, and increasing the scaffold N50 by 72.56%.
Fore and hind wings of the female
<italic toggle="yes">Lysandra bellargus</italic> specimen from which the genome was sequenced.
Dorsal (left) and ventral (right) surface view of wings from specimen EB_LB_191 (ilLysBell1) from El Brull, Catalunya, Spain, used to generate Pacific Biosciences, 10X genomics and Hi-C data.
The final assembly has a total length of 529 Mb in 139 sequence scaffolds with a scaffold N50 of 11.2 Mb (
Table 1). The majority, 99.93%, of the assembly sequence was assigned to 46 chromosomal-level scaffolds, representing 44 autosomes (numbered by sequence length) and the W and Z sex chromosomes (
Figure 2–
Figure 5;
Table 2). The putative W chromosome contains multiple separate regions with homology to microsporidian, insect and insect mitochondrial sequences, also displaying features consistent with its being a lepidopteran W chromosome (Hi-C interactions with lepidopteran chromosomes, telomeric repeats consistent with a lepidopteran origin, high repeat density, reduced coverage). We observed no evidence of extant infection with a microsporidian parasite. This suggests horizontal gene transfer from a microsporidian endosymbiont, which we have previously observed in other lepidopteran W chromosomes.
Genome data for
<italic toggle="yes">Lysandra bellargus</italic>, ilLysBell1.1.
*BUSCO scores based on the lepidoptera_odb10 BUSCO set using v5.3.2. C= complete [S= single copy, D=duplicated], F=fragmented, M=missing, n=number of orthologues in comparison. A full set of BUSCO scores is available at
https://blobtoolkit.genomehubs.org/view/ilLysBell1.1/dataset/CAJOSW01/busco.
Genome assembly of
<italic toggle="yes">Lysandra bellargus</italic>, ilLysBell1.1: metrics.
The BlobToolKit Snailplot shows N50 metrics and BUSCO gene completeness. The main plot is divided into 1,000 size-ordered bins around the circumference with each bin representing 0.1% of the 528,933,758 bp assembly. The distribution of chromosome lengths is shown in dark grey with the plot radius scaled to the longest chromosome present in the assembly (29,060,993 bp, shown in red). Orange and pale-orange arcs show the N50 and N90 chromosome lengths (11,205,580 and 8,974,749 bp), respectively. The pale grey spiral shows the cumulative chromosome count on a log scale with white scale lines showing successive orders of magnitude. The blue and pale-blue area around the outside of the plot shows the distribution of GC, AT and N percentages in the same bins as the inner plot. A summary of complete, fragmented, duplicated and missing BUSCO genes in the lepidoptera_odb10 set is shown in the top right. An interactive version of this figure is available at
https://blobtoolkit.genomehubs.org/view/ilLysBell1.1/dataset/CAJOSW01/snail.
Genome assembly of
<italic toggle="yes">Lysandra bellargus</italic>, ilLysBell1.1: GC coverage.
BlobToolKit GC-coverage plot. Scaffolds are coloured by phylum. Circles are sized in proportion to scaffold length. Histograms show the distribution of scaffold length sum along each axis. An interactive version of this figure is available at
https://blobtoolkit.genomehubs.org/view/ilLysBell1.1/dataset/CAJOSW01/blob.
Genome assembly of
<italic toggle="yes">Lysandra bellargus</italic>, ilLysBell1.1: cumulative sequence.
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/ilLysBell1.1/dataset/CAJOSW01/cumulative.
Genome assembly of
<italic toggle="yes">Lysandra bellargus</italic>, ilLysBell1.1: Hi-C contact map.
Hi-C contact map of the ilLysBell1.1 assembly, visualised in HiGlass. Chromosomes are arranged in size order from left to right and top to bottom. The interactive Hi-C map can be viewed at
https://genome-note-higlass.tol.sanger.ac.uk/l/?d=BZpgv8y6Q_2udwxedQCuYA.
Chromosomal pseudomolecules in the genome assembly of
<italic toggle="yes">Lysandra bellargus</italic>, ilLysBell1.1.
INSDC accession
Chromosome
Size (Mb)
GC%
HG995320.1
1
18.03
36.8
HG995321.1
2
16.11
36.6
HG995322.1
3
16
35.9
HG995323.1
4
14.92
36
HG995324.1
5
14.16
36.7
HG995325.1
6
13.29
36.5
HG995326.1
7
13.03
36.4
HG995327.1
8
12.89
36.3
HG995328.1
9
12.69
36.7
HG995329.1
10
12.63
37
HG995330.1
11
12.36
36.2
HG995331.1
12
12.19
36.7
HG995332.1
13
12.19
36.4
HG995333.1
14
12.14
36.5
HG995334.1
15
12.01
36.7
HG995335.1
16
11.66
36.6
HG995336.1
17
11.44
35.9
HG995337.1
18
11.21
36.6
HG995338.1
19
11.11
36.5
HG995339.1
20
11.09
36.5
HG995340.1
21
11.03
36.4
HG995341.1
22
10.81
36.6
HG995342.1
23
10.76
37
HG995343.1
24
10.71
36.4
HG995344.1
25
10.24
36.2
HG995345.1
26
10.16
36.5
HG995346.1
27
10.09
36.2
HG995347.1
28
10.09
36.4
HG995348.1
29
10.04
36.3
HG995349.1
30
9.99
37
HG995350.1
31
9.86
35.9
HG995351.1
32
9.83
36.4
HG995352.1
33
9.52
36.6
HG995353.1
34
9.46
36.2
HG995354.1
35
9.37
36.2
HG995355.1
36
9.26
36.1
HG995356.1
37
9.25
36.7
HG995357.1
38
8.99
36.7
HG995358.1
39
8.97
36.5
HG995359.1
40
8.94
36.6
HG995360.1
41
8.65
36.4
HG995361.1
42
8.59
36.5
HG995362.1
43
8.41
36.3
HG995363.1
44
8.29
36.8
HG995364.1
W
4.54
36.1
HG995319.1
Z
29.06
35.9
HG995365.1
MT
0.02
19.1
-
Unplaced
2.86
40.3
The assembly has a BUSCO v5.3.2 (
Manni
et al., 2021) completeness of 97.4% (single 96.9%, duplicated 0.5%) using the lepidoptera_odb10 reference set (n=5,286). While not fully phased, the assembly deposited is of a single haplotype. Contigs corresponding to the second haplotype have also been deposited.
Genome annotation report
The ilLysBell1.1 genome was annotated using the Ensembl rapid annotation pipeline (
Table 1;
Lysandra bellargus Ensembl page). The resulting annotation includes 24,348 transcribed mRNAs from 13,249 protein-coding and 2,895 non-coding genes. There is an average of 7.00 exons and 6.00 introns per canonical protein coding transcript, with an average intron length of 2,238.35 bases.
MethodsSample acquisition and nucleic acid extraction
Two
L. bellargus specimens (ilLysBell1, female; ilLysBell2, male) were collected using a net from El Brull, Catalunya, Spain (latitude 41.8103, longitude 2.3054) by Konrad Lohse (University of Edinburgh) and Alex Hayward (University of Exeter). The specimens were identified by Roger Vila (Institut de Biologia Evolutiva, Barcelona) and flash frozen from live in a dry shipper.
DNA was extracted at the Scientific Operations Core, Wellcome Sanger Institute. The ilLysBell1 sample was weighed and dissected on dry ice with head tissue set aside for Hi-C sequencing. Whole organism tissue was disrupted by manual grinding in lysis buffer with a disposable pestle. Fragment size analysis of 0.01–0.5 ng of DNA was then performed using an Agilent FemtoPulse. High molecular weight (HMW) DNA was extracted using the Qiagen MagAttract HMW DNA extraction kit. Low molecular weight DNA was removed from a 200-ng aliquot of extracted DNA using 0.8X AMpure XP purification kit prior to 10X Chromium sequencing; a minimum of 50 ng DNA was submitted for 10X sequencing. HMW DNA was sheared into an average fragment size between 12–20 kb in a Megaruptor 3 system with speed setting 30. Sheared DNA was purified by solid-phase reversible immobilisation using AMPure PB beads with a 1.8X ratio of beads to sample to remove the shorter fragments and concentrate the DNA sample. The concentration of the sheared and purified DNA was assessed using a Nanodrop spectrophotometer and Qubit Fluorometer and Qubit dsDNA High Sensitivity Assay kit. Fragment size distribution was evaluated by running the sample on the FemtoPulse system.
RNA was extracted from the whole organism tissue of ilLysBell2 in the Tree of Life Laboratory at the WSI using TRIzol, according to the manufacturer’s instructions. RNA was then eluted in 50 μl RNAse-free water and its concentration assessed using a Nanodrop spectrophotometer and Qubit Fluorometer using the Qubit RNA Broad-Range (BR) Assay kit. Analysis of the integrity of the RNA was done using Agilent RNA 6000 Pico Kit and Eukaryotic Total RNA assay.
Sequencing
Pacific Biosciences HiFi circular consensus and 10X Genomics Chromium read cloud sequencing libraries were constructed according to the manufacturers’ instructions. Sequencing was performed by the Scientific Operations core at the Wellcome Sanger Institute on Pacific Biosciences SEQUEL II (HiFi), Illumina HiSeq X Ten and Illumina HiSeq 4000 (RNA-Seq) instruments. Hi-C data were generated in the Tree of Life laboratory from remaining whole organism tissue of ilLysBell1 using the Arima v2 kit and sequenced on a NovaSeq 6000 instrument.
Genome assembly
Assembly was carried out with Hicanu (
Nurk
et al., 2020); haplotypic duplication was identified and removed with purge_dups (
Guan
et al., 2020). One round of polishing was performed by aligning 10X Genomics read data to the assembly with longranger align, calling variants with freebayes (
Garrison & Marth, 2012). The assembly was then scaffolded with Hi-C data (
Rao
et al., 2014) using SALSA2 (
Ghurye
et al., 2019). The assembly was checked for contamination and corrected using the gEVAL system (
Chow
et al., 2016) as described previously (
Howe
et al., 2021). Manual curation (
Howe
et al., 2021) was performed using gEVAL, HiGlass (
Kerpedjiev
et al., 2018) and
Pretext. The mitochondrial genome was assembled using MitoHiFi (
Uliano-Silva
et al., 2021), which performs annotation using MitoFinder (
Allio
et al., 2020). The genome was analysed and BUSCO scores generated within the BlobToolKit environment (
Challis
et al., 2020).
Table 3 contains a list of all software tool versions used, where appropriate.
The Ensembl gene annotation system (
Aken
et al., 2016) was used to generate annotation for the
Lysandra bellargus assembly (GCA_905333045.1). Annotation was created primarily through alignment of transcriptomic data to the genome, with gap filling via protein-to-genome alignments of a select set of proteins from UniProt (
UniProt Consortium, 2019).
Data availability
European Nucleotide Archive: Lysandra bellargus (Adonis blue). Accession number
PRJEB43534;
https://identifiers.org/ena.embl/PRJEB43534
The genome sequence is released openly for reuse. The
L. bellargus genome sequencing initiative is part of the
Darwin Tree of Life (DToL) project. All raw sequence data and the assembly have been deposited in INSDC databases. Raw data and assembly accession identifiers are reported in
Table 1.
Author information
Members of the Wellcome Sanger Institute Tree of Life programme are listed here:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6866293.
Members of Wellcome Sanger Institute Scientific Operations: DNA Pipelines collective are listed here:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5746904.
Members of the Tree of Life Core Informatics collective are listed here:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6125046.
Members of the Darwin Tree of Life Consortium are listed here:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6418363.
AkenBLAylingSBarrellD:
The Ensembl Gene Annotation System.Database (Oxford).2016;2016:baw093.
2733798010.1093/database/baw0934919035AllioRSchomaker-BastosARomiguierJ:
MitoFinder: Efficient Automated Large-Scale Extraction of Mitogenomic Data in Target Enrichment Phylogenomics.Mol Ecol Resour.2020;20(4):892–905.
3224309010.1111/1755-0998.131607497042BournNADWarrenMS, Butterfly Conservation:
ADONIS BLUE Lysandra Bellargus (Polyommatus Bellargus).Butterfly Conservation Society.1998.
Reference SourceCarterDJHargreavesB:
A Field Guide to Caterpillars of Butterflies and Moths in Britain and Europe.Collins,1986.
Reference SourceChallisRRichardsERajanJ:
BlobToolKit - Interactive Quality Assessment of Genome Assemblies.G3 (Bethesda).2020;10(4):1361–74.
3207107110.1534/g3.119.4009087144090ChowWBruggerKCaccamoM:
gEVAL - a web-based browser for evaluating genome assemblies.Bioinformatics.2016;32(16):2508–10.
2715359710.1093/bioinformatics/btw1594978925FoxRDennisEBBrownAF:
A Revised Red List of British Butterflies.Insect Conserv Divers.Royal Entomological Society of London,2022.
10.1111/icad.12582GarrisonEMarthG:
Haplotype-Based Variant Detection from Short-Read Sequencing.2012; arXiv:1207.3907.
10.48550/arXiv.1207.3907GhuryeJRhieAWalenzBP:
Integrating Hi-C Links with Assembly Graphs for Chromosome-Scale Assembly.PLoS Comput Biol.2019;15(8):e1007273.
3143379910.1371/journal.pcbi.10072736719893GuanDMcCarthySAWoodJ:
Identifying and Removing Haplotypic Duplication in Primary Genome Assemblies.Bioinformatics.2020;36(9):2896–98.
3197157610.1093/bioinformatics/btaa0257203741HarperGLMacleanNGoulsonD:
Microsatellite Markers to Assess the Influence of Population Size, Isolation and Demographic Change on the Genetic Structure of the UK Butterfly
Polyommatus bellargus.Mol Ecol.2003;12(12):3349–57.
1462935110.1046/j.1365-294x.2003.02012.xHoweKChowWCollinsJ:
Significantly Improving the Quality of Genome Assemblies through Curation.GigaScience.2021;10(1):giaa153.
3342077810.1093/gigascience/giaa1537794651KerpedjievPAbdennurNLekschasF:
HiGlass: Web-Based Visual Exploration and Analysis of Genome Interaction Maps.Genome Biol.2018;19(1):125.
3014302910.1186/s13059-018-1486-16109259LorkovicZ:
The Butterfly Chromosomes and Their Application in Systematics and Phylogeny.Butterflies of Europe.1990;332–96.ManniMBerkeleyMRSeppeyM:
BUSCO Update: Novel and Streamlined Workflows along with Broader and Deeper Phylogenetic Coverage for Scoring of Eukaryotic, Prokaryotic, and Viral Genomes.Mol Biol Evol.2021;38(10):4647–54.
3432018610.1093/molbev/msab1998476166NurkSWalenzBPRhieA:
HiCanu: Accurate Assembly of Segmental Duplications, Satellites, and Allelic Variants from High-Fidelity Long Reads.Genome Res.2020;30(9):1291–1305.
3280114710.1101/gr.263566.1207545148RaoSSHuntleyMHDurandNC:
A 3D Map of the Human Genome at Kilobase Resolution Reveals Principles of Chromatin Looping.Cell.2014;159(7):1665–80.
2549754710.1016/j.cell.2014.11.0215635824RaperC:
United Kingdom Species Inventory (UKSI).Natural History Museum,2021.
10.15468/RM6PM4StillJ:
Collins Wild Guide: Butterflies and Moths.Harper Collins, London,1996.ThomasJA:
The Ecology and Conservation of Lysandra bellargus (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) in Britain.J Appl Ecol.1983;20(1):59–83.
10.2307/2403376Uliano-SilvaMNunesJGFKrasheninnikovaK:
marcelauliano/MitoHiFi: mitohifi_v2.0.2021.
10.5281/zenodo.5205678UniProt Consortium:
UniProt: A Worldwide Hub of Protein Knowledge.Nucleic Acids Res.2019;47(D1):D506–15.
3039528710.1093/nar/gky10496323992van SwaayCCuttelodACollinsS:
European Red List of Butterflies.2010.
Reference Source10.21956/wellcomeopenres.20317.r56068Reviewer response for version 1Celorio-ManceraMaria de la Paz1Refereehttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-0296-0577
Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
The authors present the genome assembly for the Adonis blue,
Lysandra bellargus. The species is of interest since it is considered vulnerable in the UK and because of two other observations: its potential capacity of population recovery from a limited number of individuals and its unusual number of chromosomes when compared to that observed among the family Lycaenidae. In general, the article reports a well conducted effort to obtain the genome of this species of butterfly. My concerns are related to the rationale and the protocols used for the study.
First, if the species is of interest due to its chromosome number, would the authors have observed or expect intraspecific variability in the karyotype of the species? This exceptional although possible circumstance is not addressed. Unfortunately, since the study does not provide a chromosome level genome (no linkage mapping done), the authors can not conclude the actual number of chromosomes found in their specimen.
Second, there is a general effort in the community to provide genomes that are as homozygous as possible. I understand that inbreeding and laboratory breeding is difficult in some species. However, I miss the effort from the authors to provide a somewhat homozygous genome and therefore nucleotide diversity as a potential concern if using this genome as a reference.
I found the BlobToolKit a very nice tool for the visualisation of genome data.
Are sufficient details of methods and materials provided to allow replication by others?
Yes
Is the rationale for creating the dataset(s) clearly described?
Partly
Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format?
Yes
Are the protocols appropriate and is the work technically sound?
Partly
Reviewer Expertise:
Plant Biology, Plant-Insect Interactions, Enzymology, Proteomics, Transcriptomics, Population Genomics
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.
10.21956/wellcomeopenres.20317.r55785Reviewer response for version 1RastasPasi1Referee
Institute of Biotechnology, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
The authors present a chromosome level assembly of the Adonis blue -butterfly using Pacbio Hifi, Hi-C and 10x data. The assembly is of high quality.
The assembly pipeline is described very briefly and is a bit confusing. Here are some questions about the pipeline and the article:
Were the default parameters used in the software?
Were the software applied in this order: Hicanu, purge_dups, polishing, SALSA2, manual curation?
I am wondering, this as the genome sequence report says: "Manual assembly curation corrected 207 missing/misjoins and removed 13 haplotypic duplications,..." - Is the manual curation here referring the manual curation of gEval, HiGlass and Pretext? Or are the haplotypes removed by purge_dups earlier?
One of the main concerns is the used software purge_dups. Based on its manual, it removes haplotypes only from the contig ends (on default parameters). But when assembly errors are corrected (with Hi-C), new contig ends are created and these could contain haplotypic duplications.
There could be more info (and citation) about other lepidopteran W chromosomes. Typically the chromosome synteny in lepidoptera is high, maybe an alignment to some other species could be informative (chromosomes Z, W and/or autosomes)?
Maybe it could be stated more clearly what reduced coverage means for W (and Z) chromosomes. Are the differences shown in the Figure 3?
How much did the 10x data polishing improve the genome? Did the Hifi reads / assembled contigs have worse base qualities than obtained by Illumina sequencing? Are the 10x UMIs used in the process? They could be used for scaffolding and phasing?
There is no mention of the use of RNAseq data.
Are sufficient details of methods and materials provided to allow replication by others?
Partly
Is the rationale for creating the dataset(s) clearly described?
Yes
Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format?
Yes
Are the protocols appropriate and is the work technically sound?
Partly
Reviewer Expertise:
Genome assemby, population genetics
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.
10.21956/wellcomeopenres.20317.r56069Reviewer response for version 1NabholzBenoit1Refereehttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-0447-1451
Université Montpellier, Institut Universitaire de France, Montpellier, France
Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
The authors presents the chromosome scale assembly of the Adonis blue,
Lysandra bellargus.
The genome is of high quality like the other genomes produced by the Darwin Tree of Life project. All the links and the datasets presented are publicly available.
The authors indicate that W chromosomes contains sequences homologous to microsporidian and suggest that this is likely a horizontal transfer. The authors indicate that this “...have previously observed in other lepidopteran W chromosomes” but without any reference to this claims. The authors should provide a reference to this claim.
Overall, I would like to thank the Darwin Tree of Life Consortium for the whole project. It provides high quality genomes that are quickly and transparently available. This project is really well organised and its very valuable to the scientific community.
Are sufficient details of methods and materials provided to allow replication by others?
Yes
Is the rationale for creating the dataset(s) clearly described?
Yes
Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format?
Yes
Are the protocols appropriate and is the work technically sound?
Yes
Reviewer Expertise:
Population genomics. Molecular evolution. Ornithology and entomology.
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.
10.21956/wellcomeopenres.20317.r55132Reviewer response for version 1TørresenOle Kristian1Refereehttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-1932-8212
Centre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
The authors have assembled a genome of the Adonis blue,
Lysandra bellargus (Rottemburg, 1775), using a combination of PacBio HiFi, 10X Genomics and Arima Hi-C reads. The metrics with regards to N50 contig and scaffold, BUSCO genes and number of sequences in chromosomes, are all very good.
The methods used are all standard and expected to give good results. However, it is not given enough details to replicate the process. For instance, were all the software run with default options, or were any parameters adjusted?
How much did the single round of polishing affect the assembly? Considering that the HiFi data is of quite high quality from before. How the polishing affected the assembly could assessed by quality values and k-mer completeness as reported by Merqury, seeing how this varies between different assemblies. It would at least have been nice to see the values for the final assembly.
Are sufficient details of methods and materials provided to allow replication by others?
Partly
Is the rationale for creating the dataset(s) clearly described?
Yes
Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format?
Yes
Are the protocols appropriate and is the work technically sound?
Yes
Reviewer Expertise:
Genomics
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.