Abstract
We present a genome assembly of Frangula alnus (alder buckthorn; Streptophyta; Magnoliopsida; Rosales; Rhamnaceae). The assembly consists of two haplotypes with total lengths of 279.06 megabases and 281.25 megabases. Most of haplotype 1 (99.91%) is scaffolded into 10 chromosomal pseudomolecules. Most of haplotype 2 (99.91%) is scaffolded into 10 chromosomal pseudomolecules. The mitochondrial sequence has a length of 492.03 kilobases and the plastid genome assembly has a length of 161.23 kilobases. This assembly was generated as part of the Darwin Tree of Life project, which produces reference genomes for eukaryotic species found in Britain and Ireland.
Keywords: Frangula alnus, alder buckthorn, genome sequence, chromosomal, Rosales
Species taxonomy
Eukaryota; Viridiplantae; Streptophyta; Streptophytina; Embryophyta; Tracheophyta; Euphyllophyta; Spermatophyta; Magnoliopsida; Mesangiospermae; eudicotyledons; Gunneridae; Pentapetalae; rosids; fabids; Rosales; Rhamnaceae; rhamnoid group; Rhamneae; Frangula; Frangula alnus Mill., 1768 (NCBI:txid106677).
Background
Frangula alnus (alder buckthorn) is a deciduous shrub or small tree that occurs across a wide range of soil types, although it tends to avoid both drought-prone and permanently waterlogged sites ( Stroh et al., 2023). It is typically found in scrub on fen peat, at the margins of raised mires, on heathlands and valley mires, and within woodland edges, scrub and hedgerows ( Stroh et al., 2023). Within Britain and Ireland, the species is locally common in England and Wales but is considerably more scattered in Scotland and Ireland ( Stace, 2019). In Northern Ireland, F. alnus is protected under the Wildlife (Northern Ireland) Order (1985) and is recognised as a Priority Species for Conservation Action ( Bradley et al., 2009). Its native range extends from Europe to Central Siberia and Xinjiang, with populations also occurring in north-west Africa ( POWO, 2026).
Frangula alnus is reported to be diploid (2 n = 20), with three chromosome counts of this number reported from British and Irish populations ( Godwin, 1943; Gornall et al., 2021; Rutland, 1941).
Alder Bbckthorn is an ecologically significant species that supports a diverse range of wildlife. Notably, it is one of only two larval host plants for the Common Brimstone butterfly ( Gonepteryx rhamni), whose distribution in Britain has been shown to closely track the natural range of its host plants ( Cowley et al., 2000; Gutiérrez & Thomas, 2000).
Landscape genomic studies of native European populations indicate that genetic variation in Frangula alnus is influenced by environmental selection, with precipitation and temperature identified as important drivers of adaptive differentiation ( De Kort et al., 2015).
The high-quality genome sequence presented here provides an important resource for investigating the genetic basis of adaptation and resilience in this species as environmental conditions continue to change. In addition, genomic resources could facilitate research into the coevolutionary relationship between F. alnus and specialist species such as the Brimstone butterfly.
The assembly was produced using the Tree of Life pipeline from a specimen collected from Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh (Inverleith), Scotland, UK (55.97, −3.21) ( Figure 1).
Figure 1. Photographs of the Frangula alnus specimen (drFraAlnu1) from which samples were taken for genome sequencing.
Methods
Sample acquisition, flow cytometry and DNA barcoding
A specimen of Frangula alnus (specimen ID EDTOL00065, ToLID drFraAlnu1; Figure 1) was used for genome sequencing. It was collected from Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh Scotland, UK (latitude 55.9652, longitude −3.2092) on 2022-08-08. The specimen was collected and identified by Vladimir Krivtsov (Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh). The herbarium voucher associated with the sequenced plant is has been deposited in the herbarium of RBG Edinburgh (E) https://data.rbge.org.uk/herb/E01358629.
The genome size was estimated by flow cytometry following the ‘one-step’ method outlined in Pellicer et al. (2021) and using propidium iodide as the fluorochrome. The General Purpose Buffer (GPB) supplemented with 3% PVP and 0.08% (v/v) beta-mercaptoethanol was used for isolation of nuclei ( Loureiro et al., 2007), and the internal calibration standard was Solanum lycopersicum L. ‘Stupické polní rané’ with an assumed 1C-value of 968 Mb ( Doležel et al., 2007).
The initial identification was verified by an additional DNA barcoding process according to the framework developed by Twyford et al. (2024). Part of the plant specimen was preserved in silica gel desiccant ( Chase & Hills, 1991). DNA extracted from the dried plant was amplified by PCR for standard barcode markers, with the amplicons sequenced and compared to public sequence databases including GenBank and the Barcode of Life Database (BOLD) ( Ratnasingham & Hebert, 2007). 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 are available on protocols.io.
Nucleic acid extraction
Protocols for high molecular weight (HMW) DNA extraction developed at the Wellcome Sanger Institute (WSI) Tree of Life Core Laboratory are available on protocols.io ( Howard et al., 2025). The drFraAlnu1 sample was weighed and triaged to determine the appropriate extraction protocol. For HMW DNA extraction, 94.0 mg of leaf tissue was homogenised by cryogenic bead beating. The Plant Organic Extraction protocol was used. DNA was then sheared into an average fragment size of 12–20 kb following the Megaruptor®3 for LI PacBio protocol. Sheared DNA was purified by automated SPRI (solid-phase reversible immobilisation), using AMPure PB beads (Pacific Biosciences) and the Thermo Fisher KingFisher™ Apex to eliminate shorter fragments and concentrate the DNA. 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. For this sample, the final post-shearing DNA had a Qubit concentration of 12.1 ng/μL with a fragment size of 15.6 kb.
PacBio HiFi library preparation and sequencing
Library preparation and sequencing were performed at the WSI Scientific Operations core. Libraries were prepared using the SMRTbell Prep Kit 3.0 (Pacific Biosciences) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. The kit includes reagents for end repair/A-tailing, adapter ligation, post-ligation SMRTbell bead clean-up, and nuclease treatment. Size selection and clean-up were performed using diluted AMPure PB beads (Pacific Biosciences). DNA concentration was quantified using a Qubit Fluorometer v4.0 (ThermoFisher Scientific) and the Qubit 1X dsDNA HS assay kit. Final library fragment size was assessed with the Agilent Femto Pulse Automated Pulsed Field CE Instrument (Agilent Technologies) using the gDNA 55 kb BAC analysis kit.
The sample was sequenced on a Revio instrument (Pacific Biosciences, California, USA). Prepared libraries selected for multiplexing were pooled based on genome size, library molarity, and the intended plex level. Primers were annealed and polymerases were bound to generate circularised complexes, following the manufacturer’s instructions. Complexes were purified using SMRTbell beads, diluted to the Revio loading concentration, and spiked with a Revio sequencing internal control. The pooled libraries were sequenced on a Revio 25 M Plex SMRT cell in a 3-plex run. SMRT Link software (Pacific Biosciences), a web-based workflow manager, was used to configure and monitor the run and to carry out primary and secondary data analysis.
Hi-C
Sample preparation and crosslinking
Hi-C data were generated from the leaf tissue of drFraAlnu1 using the Arima-HiC v2 kit (Arima Genomics). Tissue was finely ground using the Covaris cryoPREP Dry Pulverizer (Covaris), and then subjected to nuclei isolation. Nuclei were isolated using a modified protocol based on the Qiagen QProteome Cell Compartment Kit (Qiagen), in which only the Lysis and CE2 buffers were used, with QIAshredder spin columns. After isolation, nuclei were fixed using formaldehyde to a final concentration of 2% to crosslink the DNA. The crosslinked DNA was then digested and biotinylated according to the manufacturer’s instructions. A clean-up step was performed with SPRIselect beads before library preparation. DNA concentration was quantified using the Qubit Fluorometer v4.0 (Thermo Fisher Scientific) and the Qubit HS Assay Kit, following the manufacturer’s instructions.
Hi-C library preparation and sequencing
Biotinylated DNA constructs were fragmented using a Covaris E220 sonicator and size selected to 400–600 bp using SPRISelect beads. DNA was enriched with Arima-HiC v2 kit Enrichment beads. End repair, A-tailing, and adapter ligation were carried out with the NEBNext Ultra II DNA Library Prep Kit (New England Biolabs), following a modified protocol where library preparation occurs while DNA remains bound to the Enrichment beads. Library amplification was performed using KAPA HiFi HotStart mix and a custom Unique Dual Index (UDI) barcode set (Integrated DNA Technologies). Depending on sample concentration and biotinylation percentage determined at the crosslinking stage, libraries were amplified with 10–16 PCR cycles. Post-PCR clean-up was performed with SPRISelect beads. Libraries were quantified using the AccuClear Ultra High Sensitivity dsDNA Standards Assay Kit (Biotium) and a FLUOstar Omega plate reader (BMG Labtech).
Prior to sequencing, libraries were normalised to 10 ng/μL. Normalised libraries were quantified again to create equimolar and/or weighted 2.8 nM pools. Pool concentrations were checked using the Agilent 4200 TapeStation (Agilent) with High Sensitivity D500 reagents before sequencing. Sequencing was performed using paired-end 150 bp reads on the Illumina NovaSeq 6000.
Genome 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, 2022), producing two haplotypes. Hi-C reads ( Rao et al., 2014) were mapped to the primary contigs using bwa-mem2 ( Vasimuddin et al., 2019). Contigs were further scaffolded with Hi-C data in 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 MerquryFK ( Rhie et al., 2020). The organelle genomes were assembled using OATK ( Zhou et al., 2025). The comparator for the mitochondrial assembly was the mitochondrial genome of Ziziphus jujuba (NC_029809.1).
Assembly curation
The assembly was decontaminated using the Assembly Screen for Cobionts and Contaminants ( ASCC) pipeline. TreeVal was used to generate the flat files and maps for use in curation. Manual curation was conducted primarily in PretextView and HiGlass ( Kerpedjiev et al., 2018). Scaffolds were visually inspected and corrected as described by Howe et al. (2021). Manual corrections included 29 breaks and 122 joins. This reduced the scaffold count by 71.6%, reduced the scaffold N50 by 2.3%, and increased the total assembly length by 0.8%. The curation process is described at sanger-tol/curation-resources . PretextSnapshot was used to generate a Hi-C contact map of the final assembly.
Assembly quality assessment
The MerquryFK tool ( Rhie et al., 2020) was run in a Singularity container ( Kurtzer et al., 2017) to evaluate k-mer completeness and assembly quality for both haplotypes using the k-mer database ( k = 31) computed prior to genome assembly. The analysis outputs included assembly QV scores and completeness statistics.
The genome was analysed using the BlobToolKit pipeline, a Nextflow implementation of the earlier Snakemake version ( Challis et al., 2020). PacBio reads were aligned to the assembly using minimap2 ( Li, 2018) and processed with SAMtools ( Danecek et al., 2021) to generate coverage tracks. The pipeline runs BUSCO ( Manni et al., 2021) using lineages identified from the NCBI Taxonomy ( Schoch et al., 2020). For the three basal BUSCO lineages, eukaryota, bacteria and archaea, BUSCO genes are aligned to the UniProt Reference Proteomes database ( Bateman et al., 2023) using DIAMOND BLASTp ( Buchfink et al., 2021). The genome assembly is divided into chunks based on the density of BUSCO genes from the closest taxonomic lineage, and each chunk is aligned to the UniProt Reference Proteomes database using DIAMOND BLASTx. Sequences without DIAMOND BLASTx hits are extracted using seqtk and aligned to the NT database using BLASTn ( Altschul et al., 1990). The outputs are consolidated into a BlobDir for visualisation in BlobToolKit. The BlobToolKit pipeline was developed using nf-core tooling ( Ewels et al., 2020) and MultiQC ( Ewels et al., 2016), with containerisation through Docker ( Merkel, 2014) and Singularity ( Kurtzer et al., 2017).
Genome sequence report
Sequence data
The genome of a specimen of Frangula alnus was sequenced using Pacific Biosciences single-molecule HiFi long reads, generating 27.26 Gb (gigabases) from 2.73 million reads, which were used to assemble the genome. GenomeScope2.0 analysis using a p = 2 model gave a k-mer-based genome size estimate of 314.46 Mb, with a heterozygosity of 0.38% and repeat content of 46.70% ( Figure 2). Using flow cytometry, the genome size (1C-value) of the sample was estimated to be 0.36 pg, equivalent to 350.00 Mb. These estimates guided expectations for the assembly. Based on the estimated genome size, the sequencing data provided approximately 84× coverage. Hi-C sequencing produced 119.89 Gb from 396.97 million read pairs, which were used to scaffold the assembly. Table 1 summarises the specimen and sequencing details.
Figure 2. Frequency distribution of k-mers generated using GenomeScope2.
The plot shows observed and modelled k-mer spectra, providing estimates of genome size, heterozygosity, and repeat content based on unassembled sequencing reads.
Table 1. Specimen and sequencing data for Frangula alnus (BioProject PRJEB73435).
| Platform | PacBio HiFi | Hi-C |
|---|---|---|
| ToLID | drFraAlnu1 | drFraAlnu1 |
| Specimen ID | EDTOL00065 | EDTOL00065 |
| BioSample (source individual) | SAMEA7535977 | SAMEA7535977 |
| BioSample (tissue) | SAMEA111431655 | SAMEA111431656 |
| Tissue | leaf | leaf |
| Instrument | Revio | Illumina NovaSeq 6000 |
| Run accessions | ERR12721077 | ERR12723492 |
| Read count total | 2.73 million reads | 396.97 million read pairs |
| Base count total | 27.26 Gb | 119.89 Gb |
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 final assembly has a total length of 279.06 Mb in 21 scaffolds, with 127 gaps, and a scaffold N50 of 24.62 Mb ( Table 2).
Table 2. Genome assembly statistics for Frangula alnus.
| Genome assembly | Haplotype 1 | Haplotype 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Assembly name | drFraAlnu1.hap1.1 | drFraAlnu1.hap2.1 |
| Assembly accession | GCA_964106965.1 | GCA_964106655.1 |
| Assembly level | chromosome | chromosome |
| Span (Mb) | 279.06 | 281.25 |
| Number of chromosomes | 10 | 10 |
| Number of contigs | 148 | 135 |
| Contig N50 | 7.34 Mb | 7.04 Mb |
| Number of scaffolds | 21 | 18 |
| Scaffold N50 | 24.62 Mb | 25.06 Mb |
| Longest scaffold length (Mb) | 50.97 | 51.05 |
| Organelles | Mitochondrial genome: 492.03 kb; Plastid genome: 161.23 kb | - |
The scaffold count follows the NCBI assembly statistics and excludes organelle assemblies, which are reported separately where present.
Most of the assembly sequence (99.91%) was assigned to 10 chromosomal-level scaffolds. These chromosome-level scaffolds, confirmed by Hi-C data, are named according to size ( Figure 3; Table 3). This genome has been assembled using PacBio and HiC data and phased. The result is two curated haplotypes. Chromosome 8 contains a large haplotypic inversion between ~17.8 and 20.5 Mbp (Hap 2 coordinates). The following regions of haplotype 1 are of uncertain order and orientation: Chromosome 2 ~ 7.3–10.9 Mbp, Chromosome 8 ~ 13.2–14.2 Mbp. The following regions of haplotype 2 are of uncertain order and orientation: Chromosome 2 ~ 7.1–9.5 Mbp, Chromosome 8 ~ 13.2–16.9 Mbp.
Figure 3. Hi-C contact map of the Frangula alnus genome assembly.
Assembled chromosomes are shown in order of size and labelled along the axes, with a megabase scale shown below. The plot was generated using PretextSnapshot.
Table 3. Chromosomal pseudomolecules in both haplotypes of the genome assembly of Frangula alnus, drFraAlnu1.
| Haplotype 1 | Haplotype 2 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| INSDC accession | Name | Length (Mb) | GC% | INSDC accession | Name | Length (Mb) | GC% |
| OZ066669.1 | 1 | 50.97 | 35 | OZ066628.1 | 1 | 51.05 | 35 |
| OZ066670.1 | 2 | 41.97 | 37 | OZ066629.1 | 2 | 40.55 | 36 |
| OZ066671.1 | 3 | 25.20 | 35.50 | OZ066631.1 | 3 | 25.06 | 35.50 |
| OZ066672.1 | 4 | 24.62 | 35 | OZ066634.1 | 4 | 24.27 | 35 |
| OZ066673.1 | 5 | 24.43 | 35 | OZ066633.1 | 5 | 24.44 | 35 |
| OZ066674.1 | 6 | 24.28 | 35 | OZ066630.1 | 6 | 25.44 | 35.50 |
| OZ066675.1 | 7 | 22.99 | 35 | OZ066635.1 | 7 | 23.24 | 35 |
| OZ066676.1 | 8 | 22.16 | 35.50 | OZ066632.1 | 8 | 24.49 | 36 |
| OZ066677.1 | 9 | 21.39 | 35 | OZ066636.1 | 9 | 21.44 | 35 |
| OZ066678.1 | 10 | 20.79 | 35 | OZ066637.1 | 10 | 21.01 | 35 |
The mitochondrial genome (length 492.03 kb, OZ066679.1) and plastid genome (length 161.23 kb, OZ066680.1) were also assembled. These sequences are included as contigs in the multifasta file of the genome submission and as standalone records.
Assembly quality metrics
For haplotype 1, the estimated QV is 61.9, and for haplotype 2, 62.6. When the two haplotypes are combined, the assembly achieves an estimated QV of 62.2. The k-mer completeness is 89.80% for haplotype 1, 89.87% for haplotype 2, and 99.03% for the combined haplotypes ( Figure 4).
Figure 4. Evaluation of k-mer completeness using MerquryFK.
This plot illustrates the recovery of k-mers from the original read data in the final assemblies. The horizontal axis represents k-mer multiplicity, and the vertical axis shows the number of k-mers. The black curve represents k-mers that appear in the reads but are not assembled. The green curve corresponds to k-mers shared by both assemblies, and the red and blue curves show k-mers found only in one assembly.
BUSCO analysis using the eudicots_odb10 reference set ( n = 2 326) identified 98.2% of the expected gene set (single = 95.1%, duplicated = 3.1%) for haplotype 1. The snail plot in Figure 5 summarises the scaffold length distribution and other assembly statistics for haplotype 1. The blob plot in Figure 6 shows the distribution of scaffolds by GC proportion and coverage for haplotype 1.
Figure 5. Assembly metrics for drFraAlnu1.hap1.1.
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 eudicots_odb10 set is presented at the top right. An interactive version of this figure can be accessed on the BlobToolKit viewer.
Figure 6. BlobToolKit blob plot for drFraAlnu1.hap1.1.
The plot shows base 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 on the BlobToolKit viewer.
Table 4 lists the assembly metric benchmarks adapted from Rhie et al. (2021) and the Earth BioGenome Project Report on Assembly Standards January 2026. The EBP metric calculated for haplotype 1 is 6.C.Q61, meeting the recommended 6.C.Q40 reference standard.
Table 4. Earth biogenome project summary metrics for the Frangula alnus assembly.
| Measure | Value | Benchmark |
|---|---|---|
| EBP summary (haplotype 1) | 6.C.Q61 | 6.C.Q40 |
| Contig N50 length | 7.34 Mb | ≥ 1 Mb |
| Scaffold N50 length | 24.62 Mb | = chromosome N50 |
| Consensus quality (QV) | Haplotype 1: 61.9; haplotype 2: 62.6; combined: 62.2 | ≥ 40 |
| k-mer completeness | Haplotype 1: 89.80%; Haplotype 2: 89.87%; combined: 99.03% | ≥ 90% |
| BUSCO | C:98.2% [S:95.1%, D:3.1%], F:0.3%, M:1.5%, n:2 326 | S > 90%; D < 5% |
| Percentage of assembly assigned to chromosomes | 99.91% | ≥ 90% |
Notes: The EBP summary uses log10(Contig N50); chromosome-level (C) or log10(Scaffold N50); Q (Merqury QV). BUSCO: C = complete; S = single-copy; D = duplicated; F = fragmented; M = missing; n = orthologues.
Author information
-
•
Members of the Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh Genome Acquisition Lab
-
•
Members of the Plant Genome Sizing Collective
-
•
Members of the Darwin Tree of Life Barcoding collective
-
•
Members of the Wellcome Sanger Institute Tree of Life Management, Samples and Laboratory team
-
•
Members of Wellcome Sanger Institute Scientific Operations – Sequencing Operations
-
•
Members of the Wellcome Sanger Institute Tree of Life Core Informatics team
-
•
Members of the Tree of Life Core Informatics collective
-
•
Members of the Darwin Tree of Life Consortium
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. 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.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by Wellcome through core funding to the Wellcome Sanger Institute (220540) and the Darwin Tree of Life Discretionary Award [218328, <a href=https://doi.org/10.35802/218328>https://doi.org/10.35802/218328 </a>].
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
[version 1; peer review: 2 approved]
Data availability
European Nucleotide Archive: Frangula alnus (alder buckthorn). Accession number PRJEB73435; https://identifiers.org/ena.embl/PRJEB73435. The genome sequence is released openly for reuse. The Frangula alnus genome sequencing initiative is part of the Darwin Tree of Life Project (PRJEB40665) and the Sanger Institute Tree of Life Programme (PRJEB43745). All raw sequence data and the assembly have been deposited in INSDC databases. The genome will be annotated using available RNA-Seq data and presented through the Ensembl pipeline at the European Bioinformatics Institute. Raw data and assembly accession identifiers are reported in Tables 1 and 2.
Pipelines used for genome assembly at the WSI Tree of Life are available at https://pipelines.tol.sanger.ac.uk/pipelines. Table 5 lists software versions used in this study.
Table 5. Software versions and sources used for Frangula alnus.
References
- Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, et al. : Basic Local Alignment Search Tool. J. Mol. Biol. 1990;215(3):403–410. 10.1016/S0022-2836(05)80360-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Bateman A, Martin M-J, Orchard S, et al. : UniProt: The Universal Protein Knowledgebase in 2023. Nucleic Acids Res. 2023;51(D1):D523–D531. 10.1093/nar/gkac1052 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Bradley C, Preston SJ, Provan J, et al. : Current status and conservation genetics of alder buckthorn Frangula alnus in Northern Ireland. 2009. Reference Source
- Buchfink B, Reuter K, Drost H-G: Sensitive protein alignments at tree-of-life scale using DIAMOND. Nat. Methods. 2021;18(4):366–368. 10.1038/s41592-021-01101-x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Challis R, Richards E, Rajan J, et al. : BlobToolKit – interactive quality assessment of genome assemblies. G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics. 2020;10(4):1361–1374. 10.1534/g3.119.400908 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Chase MW, Hills HH: Silica gel: An ideal material for field preservation of leaf samples for DNA studies. Taxon. 1991;40(2):215–220. 10.2307/1222975 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Cheng H, Concepcion GT, Feng X, et al. : Haplotype-resolved de novo assembly using phased assembly graphs with Hifiasm. Nat. Methods. 2021;18(2):170–175. 10.1038/s41592-020-01056-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Cheng H, Jarvis ED, Fedrigo O, et al. : Haplotype-resolved assembly of diploid genomes without parental data. Nat. Biotechnol. 2022;40(9):1332–1335. 10.1038/s41587-022-01261-x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Cowley MJR, Wilson RJ, León-Cortés JL, et al. : Habitat-based statistical models for predicting the spatial distribution of butterflies and day-flying moths in a fragmented landscape. J. Appl. Ecol. 2000;37(Suppl. 1):60–72. 10.1046/j.1365-2664.2000.00526.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Danecek P, Bonfield JK, Liddle J, et al. : Twelve years of SAMtools and BCFtools. GigaScience. 2021;10(2):giab008. 10.1093/gigascience/giab008 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- De Kort H, Vandepitte K, Mergeay J, et al. : The population genomic signature of environmental selection in the widespread insect-pollinated tree species Frangula alnus at different geographical scales. Heredity. 2015;115(5):415–425. 10.1038/hdy.2015.41 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Doležel J, Greilhuber J, Suda J: Estimation of nuclear DNA content in plants using flow cytometry. Nat. Protoc. 2007;2(9):2233–2244. 10.1038/nprot.2007.310 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ewels P, Magnusson M, Lundin S, et al. : MultiQC: Summarize analysis results for multiple tools and samples in a single report. Bioinformatics. 2016;32(19):3047–3048. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btw354 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ewels PA, Peltzer A, Fillinger S, et al. : The nf-core framework for community-curated bioinformatics pipelines. Nat. Biotechnol. 2020;38(3):276–278. 10.1038/s41587-020-0439-x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Formenti G, Abueg L, Brajuka A, et al. : Gfastats: Conversion, evaluation and manipulation of genome sequences using assembly graphs. Bioinformatics. 2022;38(17):4214–4216. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btac460 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Godwin H: Biological flora of the British Isles: Frangula alnus Miller ( Rhamnus frangula L.). J. Ecol. 1943;31(1):77–92. 10.2307/2256793 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Gornall RJ, Bailey JP, Dempsey RE, et al. : Chromosome numbers of one hundred vascular plant species from Ireland. Irish Nat. J. 2021;37(2):156–162. [Google Scholar]
- Gutiérrez D, Thomas CD: Marginal range expansion in a host-limited butterfly species Gonepteryx rhamni. Ecological Entomology. 2000;25(2):165–170. 10.1046/j.1365-2311.2000.00241.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Howard C, Denton A, Jackson B, et al. : On the path to reference genomes for all biodiversity: Lessons learned and laboratory protocols created in the Sanger Tree of Life core laboratory over the first 2000 species. bioRxiv. 2025. 10.1101/2025.04.11.648334 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Howe K, Chow W, Collins J, et al. : Significantly improving the quality of genome assemblies through curation. GigaScience. 2021;10(1):giaa153. 10.1093/gigascience/giaa153 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kerpedjiev P, Abdennur N, Lekschas F, et al. : HiGlass: Web-based visual exploration and analysis of genome interaction maps. Genome Biol. 2018;19(1):125. 10.1186/s13059-018-1486-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kurtzer GM, Sochat V, Bauer MW: Singularity: Scientific containers for mobility of compute. PLOS ONE. 2017;12(5):e0177459. 10.1371/journal.pone.0177459 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Li H: Minimap2: Pairwise alignment for nucleotide sequences. Bioinformatics. 2018;34(18):3094–3100. 10.1093/bioinformatics/bty191 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Loureiro J, Rodriguez E, Doležel J, et al. : Two new nuclear isolation buffers for plant DNA flow cytometry: A test with 37 species. Ann. Bot. 2007;100(4):875–888. 10.1093/aob/mcm152 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Manni M, Berkeley MR, Seppey M, et al. : 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):4647–4654. 10.1093/molbev/msab199 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Merkel D: Docker: Lightweight Linux containers for consistent development and deployment. Linux J. 2014;2014(239):2. 10.5555/2600239.2600241 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Pellicer J, Powell RF, Leitch IJ: The application of flow cytometry for estimating genome size, ploidy level endopolyploidy, and reproductive modes in plants. Besse P, editor. Methods in Molecular Biology. New York, NY:2021; Vol.2222:325–61. 10.1007/978-1-0716-0997-2_17 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- POWO: Plants of the World Online. 2026. Reference Source
- Ranallo-Benavidez TR, Jaron KS, Schatz MC: GenomeScope 2.0 and Smudgeplot for reference-free profiling of polyploid genomes. Nat. Commun. 2020;11(1):1432. 10.1038/s41467-020-14998-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rao SSP, Huntley MH, Durand NC, et al. : A 3D map of the human genome at kilobase resolution reveals principles of chromatin looping. Cell. 2014;159(7):1665–1680. 10.1016/j.cell.2014.11.021 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ratnasingham S, Hebert PDN: BOLD: The Barcode of Life Data System (http://www.barcodinglife.org). Mol. Ecol. Notes. 2007;7(3):355–364. 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2007.01678.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rhie A, McCarthy SA, Fedrigo O, et al. : Towards complete and error-free genome assemblies of all vertebrate species. Nature. 2021;592(7856):737–746. 10.1038/s41586-021-03451-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rhie A, Walenz BP, Koren S, et al. : Merqury: Reference-free quality, completeness, and phasing assessment for genome assemblies. Genome Biol. 2020;21(1):245. 10.1186/s13059-020-02134-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rutland JP: The Merton Catalogue: A list of chromosome numbers of British plants. Supplement no. 1. New Phytol. 1941;40(3):210–214. 10.1111/j.1469-8137.1941.tb07044.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Schoch CL, Ciufo S, Domrachev M, et al. : NCBI taxonomy: A comprehensive update on curation, resources and tools. Database. 2020;2020:baaa062. 10.1093/database/baaa062 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Stace CA: New Flora of the British Isles. C & M Floristics;2019. [Google Scholar]
- Stroh PA, Walker KJ, Humphrey TA, et al. : Plant Atlas 2020: Mapping Changes in the Distribution of the British and Irish Flora. Durham: Botanical Society of Britain; Ireland: Princeton University Press;2023. 10.1515/9780691247601 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Twyford AD, Beasley J, Barnes I, et al. : A DNA barcoding framework for taxonomic verification in the Darwin Tree of Life Project. Wellcome Open Research. 2024;9:339. 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.21143.1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Vasimuddin M, Misra S, Li H, et al. : Efficient architecture-aware acceleration of BWA-MEM for multicore systems. 2019 IEEE International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium (IPDPS). IEEE;2019;314–24. 10.1109/IPDPS.2019.00041 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Zhou C, Brown M, Blaxter M, et al. : Oatk: A de novo assembly tool for complex plant organelle genomes. Genome Biol. 2025;26(1):235. 10.1186/s13059-025-03676-6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Zhou C, McCarthy SA, Durbin R: YaHS: Yet another Hi-C scaffolding tool. Bioinformatics. 2023;39(1):btac808. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btac808 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]