Fig. 5

eukrhythmic reassemblies accurately recapitulate taxonomic information. A summed transcripts per million (TPM) as reported from Salmon mapping of the designer assembly compared to the eukrhythmic reassembly. Each point represents a genus; the dotted line is a 1-to-1 line (\(y=x\)), or collection of reference transcriptomes from the MMETSP. Circle size corresponds to community type (1–6) as described in the text; of note is that some communities have very highly abundant genera, such as the smallest circles corresponding to Community 1. B Sum of total TPM in the designer vs. reassemblies that corresponded to genera which (1) matched genera from the original MMETSP transcriptomes, (2) conflicted or did not match genera from the original MMETSP transcriptomes, or (3) were not annotated, according to EUKulele. C The number of genera that matched (true positives), did not match (false positives), or were unannotated (false negatives according to database precision). As shown in panel B, unannotated contigs at the genus level were more abundant in the reassemblies than the designer metatranscriptomes. There were also statistically significantly more matches in the designer metatranscriptomes than the reassemblies from eukrhythmic. However, false positives were occurred at a similar rate between the two assembly types, indicating that these were more likely a product of the original quality of the contigs from the MMETSP or their ability to be uniquely classified