Stokstad, E. The new potato. Science 363, 574–577 (2019).
Spooner, D. M., Ghislain, M., Simon, R., Jansky, S. H. & Gavrilenko, T. Systematics, diversity, genetics, and evolution of wild and cultivated potatoes. Bot. Rev. 80, 283–383 (2014).
Zhang, C. et al. Genome design of hybrid potato. Cell 184, 3873–3883 (2021).
The Potato Genome Sequencing Consortium. Genome sequence and analysis of the tuber crop potato. Nature 475, 189–195 (2011).
Zhou, Q. et al. Haplotype-resolved genome analyses of a heterozygous diploid potato. Nat. Genet. 52, 1018–1023 (2020).
Lian, Q. et al. Acquisition of deleterious mutations during potato polyploidization. J. Integr. Plant Biol. 61, 7–11 (2019).
Bao, Z. et al. Genome architecture and tetrasomic inheritance of autotetraploid potato. Mol. Plant 15, 1211–1226 (2022).
Jansky, S. H. et al. Reinventing potato as a diploid inbred line-based crop. Crop Sci. 56, 1412–1422 (2016).
Zhang, C. et al. The genetic basis of inbreeding depression in potato. Nat. Genet. 51, 374–378 (2019).
Wu, Y. et al. Phylogenomic discovery of deleterious mutations facilitates hybrid potato breeding. Cell 186, 2313–2328.e15 (2023).
van Lieshout, N. et al. Solyntus, the new highly contiguous reference genome for potato (Solanum tuberosum). G3 10, 3489–3495 (2020).
Freire, R. et al. Chromosome-scale reference genome assembly of a diploid potato clone derived from an elite variety. G3 11, jkab330 (2021).
Tang, D. et al. Genome evolution and diversity of wild and cultivated potatoes. Nature 606, 535–541 (2022).
Sun, H. et al. Chromosome-scale and haplotype-resolved genome assembly of a tetraploid potato cultivar. Nat. Genet. 54, 342–348 (2022).
Ye, M. et al. Generation of self-compatible diploid potato by knockout of S-RNase. Nat. Plants 4, 651–654 (2018).
Chun, S. & Fay, J. C. Identification of deleterious mutations within three human genomes. Genome Res. 19, 1553–1561 (2009).
Marsden, C. D. et al. Bottlenecks and selective sweeps during domestication have increased deleterious genetic variation in dogs. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 152–157 (2016).
Liu, Q., Zhou, Y., Morrell, P. L. & Gaut, B. S. Deleterious variants in Asian rice and the potential cost of domestication. Mol. Biol. Evol. 34, 908–924 (2017).
Zhang, X. et al. Haplotype-resolved genome assembly provides insights into evolutionary history of the tea plant Camellia sinensis. Nat. Genet. 53, 1250–1259 (2021).
Jarvis, E. D. et al. Semi-automated assembly of high-quality diploid human reference genomes. Nature 611, 519–531 (2022).
Schreiber, M., Jayakodi, M., Stein, N. & Mascher, M. Plant pangenomes for crop improvement, biodiversity and evolution. Nat. Rev. Genet. 25, 563–577 (2024).
Hardigan, M. A. et al. Genome diversity of tuber-bearing Solanum uncovers complex evolutionary history and targets of domestication in the cultivated potato. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, E9999–E10008 (2017).
Simão, F. A., Waterhouse, R. M., Ioannidis, P., Kriventseva, E. V. & Zdobnov, E. M. BUSCO: assessing genome assembly and annotation completeness with single-copy orthologs. Bioinformatics 31, 3210–3212 (2015).
Liao, W.-W. et al. A draft human pangenome reference. Nature 617, 312–324 (2023).
Pham, G. M. et al. Construction of a chromosome-scale long-read reference genome assembly for potato. GigaScience 9, giaa100 (2020).
Garrison, E. et al. Building pangenome graphs. Nat. Methods 21, 2008–2012 (2024).
Hickey, G. et al. Pangenome graph construction from genome alignments with Minigraph-Cactus. Nat. Biotechnol. 42, 663–673 (2024).
Garrison, E. & Guarracino, A. Unbiased pangenome graphs. Bioinformatics 39, btac743 (2023).
Gong, Z. et al. Repeatless and repeat-based centromeres in potato: implications for centromere evolution. Plant Cell 24, 3559–3574 (2012).
Bozan, I. et al. Pangenome analyses reveal impact of transposable elements and ploidy on the evolution of potato species. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 120, e2211117120 (2023).
Domínguez, M. et al. The impact of transposable elements on tomato diversity. Nat. Commun. 11, 4058 (2020).
Wicker, T. et al. A detailed look at 7 million years of genome evolution in a 439 kb contiguous sequence at the barley Hv‐eIF4E locus: recombination, rearrangements and repeats. Plant J. 41, 184–194 (2005).
Balachandran, P. et al. Transposable element-mediated rearrangements are prevalent in human genomes. Nat. Commun. 13, 7115 (2022).
Fang, Z. et al. Megabase-scale inversion polymorphism in the wild ancestor of maize. Genetics 191, 883–894 (2012).
Berdan, E. L., Blanckaert, A., Butlin, R. K. & Bank, C. Deleterious mutation accumulation and the long-term fate of chromosomal inversions. PLoS Genet. 17, e1009411 (2021).
Zhou, Y. et al. The population genetics of structural variants in grapevine domestication. Nat. Plants 5, 965–979 (2019).
Roumeliotis, E., Kloosterman, B., Oortwijn, M., Visser, R. G. & Bachem, C. W. The PIN family of proteins in potato and their putative role in tuberization. Front. Plant Sci. 4, 524 (2013).
Cho, S. K. et al. Polypyrimidine tract-binding proteins of potato mediate tuberization through an interaction with StBEL5 RNA. J. Exp. Bot. 66, 6835–6847 (2015).
Wang, B. et al. De novo genome assembly and analyses of 12 founder inbred lines provide insights into maize heterosis. Nat. Genet. 55, 312–323 (2023).
Xiao, H. et al. Adaptive and maladaptive introgression in grapevine domestication. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 120, e2222041120 (2023).
Bethke, P. C. et al. Diploid potatoes as a catalyst for change in the potato industry. Am. J. Potato Res. 99, 337–357 (2022).
Mezmouk, S. & Ross-Ibarra, J. The pattern and distribution of deleterious mutations in maize. G3 4, 163–171 (2014).
Li, Y. et al. Resequencing of 200 human exomes identifies an excess of low-frequency non-synonymous coding variants. Nat. Genet. 42, 969–972 (2010).
Wang, N. et al. Structural variation and parallel evolution of apomixis in citrus during domestication and diversification. Natl Sci. Rev. 9, nwac114 (2022).
Harcourt, B. E. Reflecting on the subject: a critique of the social influence conception of deterrence, the broken windows theory, and order-maintenance policing New York style. Mich. Law Rev. 97, 291 (1998).
Morgan, A. P. et al. Structural variation shapes the landscape of recombination in mouse. Genetics 206, 603–619 (2017).
Porubsky, D. et al. Recurrent inversion polymorphisms in humans associate with genetic instability and genomic disorders. Cell 185, 1986–2005 (2022).
Rowan, B. A. et al. An ultra high-density Arabidopsis thaliana crossover map that refines the influences of structural variation and epigenetic features. Genetics 213, 771–787 (2019).
Ramu, P. et al. Cassava haplotype map highlights fixation of deleterious mutations during clonal propagation. Nat. Genet. 49, 959–963 (2017).
Jiao, Y. et al. Regulation of OsSPL14 by OsmiR156 defines ideal plant architecture in rice. Nat. Genet. 42, 541–544 (2010).
Jiang, X. et al. Genomic features of meiotic crossovers in diploid potato. Hortic. Res. 10, uhad079 (2023).
Hayes, B. J. et al. Potential approaches to create ultimate genotypes in crops and livestock. Nat. Genet. 56, 2310–2317 (2024).
Filler-Hayut, S., Kniazev, K., Melamed-Bessudo, C. & Levy, A. A. Targeted inter-homologs recombination in Arabidopsis euchromatin and heterochromatin. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 22, 12096 (2021).
Schmidt, C., Schindele, P. & Puchta, H. From gene editing to genome engineering: restructuring plant chromosomes via CRISPR/Cas. Abiotech 1, 21–31 (2020).
Eizenga, J. M. et al. Pangenome graphs. Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet. 21, 139–162 (2020).
Rakocevic, G. et al. Fast and accurate genomic analyses using genome graphs. Nat. Genet. 51, 354–362 (2019).
Alonge, M. et al. Major impacts of widespread structural variation on gene expression and crop improvement in tomato. Cell 182, 145–161. e23 (2020).
Leffler, E. M. et al. Resistance to malaria through structural variation of red blood cell invasion receptors. Science 356, eaam6393 (2017).
Yan, H. et al. Pangenomic analysis identifies structural variation associated with heat tolerance in pearl millet. Nat. Genet. 55, 507–518 (2023).
Conrad, D. F. et al. Origins and functional impact of copy number variation in the human genome. Nature 464, 704–712 (2010).
Xue, J. R. et al. The functional and evolutionary impacts of human-specific deletions in conserved elements. Science 380, eabn2253 (2023).
Li, H. et al. The sequence alignment/map format and SAMtools. Bioinformatics 25, 2078–2079 (2009).
Burton, J. N. et al. Chromosome-scale scaffolding of de novo genome assemblies based on chromatin interactions. Nat. Biotechnol. 31, 1119–1125 (2013).
Kaplan, N. & Dekker, J. High-throughput genome scaffolding from in vivo DNA interaction frequency. Nat. Biotechnol. 31, 1143–1147 (2013).
Marçais, G. & Kingsford, C. A fast, lock-free approach for efficient parallel counting of occurrences of k-mers. Bioinformatics 27, 764–770 (2011).
Ranallo-Benavidez, T. R., Jaron, K. S. & Schatz, M. C. GenomeScope 2.0 and Smudgeplot for reference-free profiling of polyploid genomes. Nat. Commun. 11, 1432 (2020).
Cheng, H., Concepcion, G. T., Feng, X., Zhang, H. & Li, H. Haplotype-resolved de novo assembly using phased assembly graphs with hifiasm. Nat. Methods 18, 170–175 (2021).
Dudchenko, O. et al. De novo assembly of the Aedes aegypti genome using Hi-C yields chromosome-length scaffolds. Science 356, 92–95 (2017).
Durand, N. C. et al. Juicebox provides a visualization system for Hi-C contact maps with unlimited zoom. Cell Syst. 3, 99–101 (2016).
Martin, M. et al. WhatsHap: fast and accurate read-based phasing. Preprint at BioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/085050 (2016).
Mapleson, D., Garcia Accinelli, G., Kettleborough, G., Wright, J. & Clavijo, B. J. KAT: a K-mer analysis toolkit to quality control NGS datasets and genome assemblies. Bioinformatics 33, 574–576 (2017).
Ou, S. et al. Benchmarking transposable element annotation methods for creation of a streamlined, comprehensive pipeline. Genome Biol. 20, 275 (2019).
Flynn, J. M. et al. RepeatModeler2 for automated genomic discovery of transposable element families. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 9451–9457 (2020).
Delehelle, F., Cussat-Blanc, S., Alliot, J.-M., Luga, H. & Balaresque, P. ASGART: fast and parallel genome scale segmental duplications mapping. Bioinformatics 34, 2708–2714 (2018).
Benson, G. Tandem repeats finder: a program to analyze DNA sequences. Nucleic Acids Res. 27, 573–580 (1999).
Kim, D., Langmead, B. & Salzberg, S. L. HISAT: a fast spliced aligner with low memory requirements. Nat. Methods 12, 357–360 (2015).
Pertea, M. et al. StringTie enables improved reconstruction of a transcriptome from RNA-seq reads. Nat. Biotechnol. 33, 290–295 (2015).
Brůna, T., Hoff, K. J., Lomsadze, A., Stanke, M. & Borodovsky, M. BRAKER2: automatic eukaryotic genome annotation with GeneMark-EP+ and AUGUSTUS supported by a protein database. NAR Genomics Bioinformatics 3, lqaa108 (2021).
Stanke, M. et al. AUGUSTUS: ab initio prediction of alternative transcripts. Nucleic Acids Res. 34, W435–W439 (2006).
Lukashin, A. V. & Borodovsky, M. GeneMark. hmm: new solutions for gene finding. Nucleic Acids Res. 26, 1107–1115 (1998).
The Tomato Genome Consortium. The tomato genome sequence provides insights into fleshy fruit evolution. Nature 485, 635–641 (2012).
Li, W. & Godzik, A. Cd-hit: a fast program for clustering and comparing large sets of protein or nucleotide sequences. Bioinformatics 22, 1658–1659 (2006).
Holt, C. & Yandell, M. MAKER2: an annotation pipeline and genome-database management tool for second-generation genome projects. BMC Bioinformatics 12, 491 (2011).
Venturini, L., Caim, S., Kaithakottil, G. G., Mapleson, D. L. & Swarbreck, D. Leveraging multiple transcriptome assembly methods for improved gene structure annotation. GigaScience 7, giy093 (2018).
Haas, B. J. et al. Improving the Arabidopsis genome annotation using maximal transcript alignment assemblies. Nucleic Acids Res. 31, 5654–5666 (2003).
Jones, P. et al. InterProScan 5: genome-scale protein function classification. Bioinformatics 30, 1236–1240 (2014).
Marco-Sola, S., Moure, J. C., Moreto, M. & Espinosa, A. Fast gap-affine pairwise alignment using the wavefront algorithm. Bioinformatics 37, 456–463 (2021).
Guarracino, A., Heumos, S., Nahnsen, S., Prins, P. & Garrison, E. ODGI: understanding pangenome graphs. Bioinformatics 38, 3319–3326 (2022).
Parmigiani, L., Garrison, E., Stoye, J., Marschall, T. & Doerr, D. Panacus: fast and exact pangenome growth and core size estimation. Bioinformatics https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btae720 (2024).
Zhou, Y. et al. Graph pangenome captures missing heritability and empowers tomato breeding. Nature 606, 527–534 (2022).
Buchfink, B., Xie, C. & Huson, D. H. Fast and sensitive protein alignment using DIAMOND. Nat. Methods 12, 59–60 (2015).
Emms, D. M. & Kelly, S. OrthoFinder: phylogenetic orthology inference for comparative genomics. Genome Biol. 20, 238 (2019).
Nguyen, L.-T., Schmidt, H. A., Von Haeseler, A. & Minh, B. Q. IQ-TREE: a fast and effective stochastic algorithm for estimating maximum-likelihood phylogenies. Mol. Biol. Evol. 32, 268–274 (2015).
Yu, G., Smith, D. K., Zhu, H., Guan, Y. & Lam, T. T. Y. ggtree: an R package for visualization and annotation of phylogenetic trees with their covariates and other associated data. Methods Ecol. Evol. 8, 28–36 (2017).
Lovell, J. T. et al. GENESPACE tracks regions of interest and gene copy number variation across multiple genomes. eLife 11, e78526 (2022).
Li, H. New strategies to improve minimap2 alignment accuracy. Bioinformatics 37, 4572–4574 (2021).
Goel, M., Sun, H., Jiao, W.-B. & Schneeberger, K. SyRI: finding genomic rearrangements and local sequence differences from whole-genome assemblies. Genome Biol. 20, 277 (2019).
Danecek, P. et al. Twelve years of SAMtools and BCFtools. GigaScience 10, giab008 (2021).
Purcell, S. et al. PLINK: a tool set for whole-genome association and population-based linkage analyses. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 81, 559–575 (2007).
Wickham, H. ggplot2. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Comput. Stat. 3, 180–185 (2011).
Cheng, L. IPHs. Figshare https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.25846003.v8 (2024).
