standOff. When we have changed our mind. Some entries in the table begin with a word in capitals and the reason for it. EVIDENCE CORRECTED — the finding still stands, but we had quoted the wrong sentence from the paper, and the quotation has been replaced with the right one. RETRACTED — the entry itself was wrong; it stays on the page, marked, with the reason, rather than being deleted. WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED — the entry was wrong, and a corrected version of it appears in the entries below. Each mark carries its own reason, in brackets, because the reasons differ from one entry to the next. An entry we have WITHDRAWN is removed from this page and kept in the record, with its reason. A line reading Audit and a date is a later re-reading of the entry against its whole sentence: DOUBTFUL means it was kept, and the reason says what is loose about it. Quotation marks inside the tagger's sentence. Where a tag is the tagger's own sentence, a phrase in quotation marks inside it is borrowed from the paper — the tagger's wording around it is not. The paper's own sentence is the evidence quote shown on the same row, so the borrowing can be checked against the thing borrowed from without leaving this page. Nothing inside quotation marks anywhere on this page is ours: if it is quoted, it is the paper's. Whose words a concept carries. A concept entry records a term the paper itself uses, so the term, the sense given for it, and its evidence are the paper's own words, quoted where the paper fixes them. This is the opposite of a sense entry in the tag table, which is the tagger's sentence about how the paper uses a term. Where a concept entry could not be grounded in the paper's words, the entry says so on its own row.| relation to other work | claim_relations | how this paper stands to another: agrees, contradicts, extends, qualifies |
| claim type | claim_type | the shape of the claim: existence, mechanism, method, critique, prediction, null |
| concept edge | concept_edges | an asserted relation between two concepts, with the sentence asserting it |
| concept | concepts | an idea the paper works with, quoted where the paper uses it |
| content tag | content_tags | a finding, definition, quantity, statistic or variable named in the paper |
| contribution | contribution | what the paper claims to add |
| phenomenon | phenomenon | the effect or regularity under study |
| sense | senses | a distinct use of a term, quoted where the paper fixes it |
The reference list is not part of the text we hold for this paper. Our copy was extracted from the publisher's page and the bibliography did not survive that extraction, so the article below ends before its references. Nothing has been removed by us.
Abstract. Abstract Summary concepts↗The Genome Taxonomy Database (GTDB) and associated taxonomic classification toolkit (GTDB-Tk) have been widely adopted by the microbiology community. phenomenonconcepts↗However, the growing size of the GTDB bacterial reference tree has resulted in GTDB-Tk requiring substantial amounts of memory (∼320 GB) which limits its adoption and ease of use. contributionclaim_typeclaim_relationsconcept_edgesHere, we present an update to GTDB-Tk that uses a divide-and-conquer approach where user genomes are initially placed into a bacterial reference tree with family-level representatives followed by placement into an appropriate class-level subtree comprising species representatives. content_tagsThis substantially reduces the memory requirements of GTDB-Tk while having minimal impact on classification. Availability and implementation GTDB-Tk is implemented in Python and licenced under the GNU General Public Licence v3.0. Source code and documentation are available at: https://github.com/ecogenomics/gtdbtk . Supplementary information Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online. 1 Introduction The Genome Taxonomy Database (GTDB) and associated taxonomic classification toolkit (GTDB-Tk) has been used to assign taxonomic classifications to tens of thousands of bacterial and archaeal isolate genomes and metagenome-assemble genomes recovered from environmental and human-associated samples ( Almeida et al. , 2021 ; Chaumeil et al. , 2019 ; Nayfach et al. , 2021 ). concepts↗These classifications are consistent with the GTDB framework and based on the same relative evolutionary divergence (RED) and average nucleotide identity (ANI) criteria for circumscribing taxa ( Parks et al. , 2020 , 2022 ). concepts↗A primary step in assigning classifications is placing genomes into the GTDB bacterial or archaeal reference trees using the maximum likelihood (ML) placement tool pplacer ( Matsen et al. 2010 ). concept_edgescontent_tagsUnfortunately, ML placement with pplacer is a memory-intensive operation requiring ∼320 GB of RAM when using the GTDB R07-RS207 bacterial reference tree comprised of 62 291 genomes. Adding to this challenge is the lack of favourable alternatives to pplacer as the EPA-ng ML placement method requires more memory than pplacer and distance-based methods such as APPLES-2 have inferior performance ( Balaban et al. , 2022 ; Barbera et al. , 2019 ; Koning et al. , 2021). The GTDB bacterial reference tree has been growing rapidly in size with each GTDB release and is expected to grow by upwards of 30% per year for the next few years ( Parks et al. , 2022 ). concepts↗Unfortunately, the size of this tree results in the memory requirements of GTDB-Tk being impractical. concept_edgescontent_tagsHere, we show that the memory requirements of GTDB-Tk are reduced by dividing the GTDB bacterial reference tree into class-level subtrees and demonstrate that taxonomic classifications are largely unimpacted by this change. 2 Materials and methods GTDB-Tk v2 divides the GTDB bacterial reference tree into class-level subtrees to reduce memory requirements. Placement of a genome with pplacer now consists of two steps. concepts↗sensesFirst, a genome is placed into a backbone tree consisting of a single genome representative for each family (see Supplementary Methods ). content_tagsIf the genome is assigned to a class within this backbone tree, it is then placed into a class-level subtree to obtain a more refined placement for the genome. concepts↗The class-level subtrees were constructed in a greedy manner with the maximum size of a class-level subtree being set based on the number of species representatives in the largest class ( Gammaproteobacteria with 9582 genomes in GTDB R07-RS207). content_tagsEach class-level subtree was formed by selecting the largest class in the reference tree and traversing towards the root until the subtree contained at most 10 540 genomes (10% more than the Gammaproteobacteria ). This subtree was then pruned from the reference tree and the procedure repeated until all classes were assigned to a class-level subtree. For GTDB R07-RS207, this resulted in seven class-level trees. concepts↗Each class-level subtree was then expanded to contain a single genome from each phylum in order to allow query genomes to be placed as the most basal member of a class. Final taxonomic classifications use the same RED and ANI criterion as GTDB-Tk v1 (Chaumeil et al. , 2020) with the following additional rules: A genome not placed into a class-level subtree is assigned the classification determined in the backbone tree. content_tagsA genome placed into a class-level subtree and assigned to a phylum belonging to one of the classes contained in the subtree is assigned the classification determined in the subtree. concepts↗Otherwise, the genome is classified by taking the lowest common ancestor between the backbone and class-level subtree. concepts↗3 Results Here, we demonstrate that the taxonomic classifications produced by the divide-and-conquer approach implemented in GTDB-Tk v2 are nearly equivalent to those produced by GTDB v1 while providing a substantial reduction in required memory. 3.1 Similarity of classifications on diverse sets of genomes The concordance between GTDB-Tk v1 and v2 classifications was first assessed using 16 710 bacterial genomes from the GEMs dataset ( Nayfach et al. , 2021 ) that represent novel taxa relative to GTDB R07-RS207 ( Table 1 ). content_tagsOnly 12 genomes (0.07%) did not have identical classifications between GTDB-Tk v1 and the divide-and-conquer approach used in GTDB-Tk v2 ( Supplementary Table S1 ). concepts↗The majority of incongruence was due to genomes being over- (six genomes) or under-classified (four genomes) by a single taxonomic rank. Only two genomes had conflicting taxonomic assignments, and these were both relatively poor-quality genomes assigned as new classes in alternative phyla ( Supplementary Table S1 ). Table 1. Novelty of GEM genomes relative to GTDB R07-RS207 based on GTDB-Tk v1 classifications GTDB-Tk v2 classifications relative to GTDB-Tk v1 classifications Taxon novelty No. genomes Congruent Conflict a Underclassified b Overclassified c Novel phylum 3 2 0 0 1 Novel class 42 36 2 2 2 Novel order 144 143 0 0 1 Novel family 543 540 0 1 2 Novel genus 3222 3221 0 1 0 Novel species 12 756 12 756 0 0 0 Note : GTDB-Tk v2 predicts a different taxon (a), or less (b) or more (c) resolved classifications than GTDB-Tk v1 (see Supplementary Table S1 ). content_tagsGTDB-Tk v1 and v2 classifications were further evaluated by dereplicating the ∼60 000 genomes introduced in GTDB R07-RS207 to 23 548 genomes by randomly selecting a single genome per species. concepts↗These 23 548 genomes were then classified using the GTDB-Tk R06-RS202 reference package to further evaluate classifications on genomes with varying degrees of taxonomic novelty and to ensure results were robust with different GTDB reference packages ( Supplementary Table S2 ). content_tagsOnly 13 genomes (0.06%) had different GTDB-Tk v1 and GTDB-Tk v2 classifications with 5 having conflicting assignments, 5 being overclassified and 3 being underclassified ( Supplementary Table S3 ). 3.2 Reduced memory requirements concept_edgescontent_tagsThe divide-and-conquer approach implemented in GTDB-Tk v2 reduced the maximum memory requirements from ∼320 GB to <55 GB when run with the GTDB R07-RS207 reference trees. content_tagsGTDB-Tk v2 also ran 22–35% faster when processing 1000 genomes with 1–64 CPUs ( Supplementary Fig. S1A ) and was >40% faster when processing 5000 genomes using 32 CPUs ( Supplementary Fig. S1B ). content_tags4 Summary GTDB-Tk v2 requires only a sixth of the memory of GTDB-Tk v1 while providing almost identical classifications. More importantly, the divide-and-conquer approach used in GTDB-Tk v2 allows memory requirements to be controlled by tailoring the size of the largest subtree. concepts↗This ensures GTDB-Tk can continue to be used on readily available computing hardware even as the size of the GTDB bacterial reference tree increases. Supplementary Material btac672_Supplementary_Data Click here for additional data file. Acknowledgements We thank Morgan Price for insightful advice on using FastTree with pplacer, Brian Kemish for his help in maintaining our computing infrastructure, Maria Chuvochina and Christian Rinke for helpful discussions, and the GTDB-Tk community for their bug reports and suggestions on features to improve GTDB-Tk. Funding This work was supported by UQ Strategic Funding and Australian Research Council Laureate Fellowship [FL150100038]. Conflict of Interest : none declared. Contributor Information Pierre-Alain Chaumeil, Australian Centre for Ecogenomics, School of Chemistry and Molecular Biosciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia; Research Computing Center, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia. Aaron J Mussig, Australian Centre for Ecogenomics, School of Chemistry and Molecular Biosciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia. Philip Hugenholtz, Australian Centre for Ecogenomics, School of Chemistry and Molecular Biosciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia. Donovan H Parks, Australian Centre for Ecogenomics, School of Chemistry and Molecular Biosciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia.
Relations on this page carry a quotation for the claim. Where a relation was separately evidenced — and so tested against the vocabulary for its type — the row says so; none of 4 relations here carry that mark. The rest are the tagger’s reading of the sentence quoted beside them.
This record holds no limitations, controls or mechanisms. A layer is empty when the tagger recorded nothing in it — which is not the same as the paper having nothing to record.
| facet | tag | field | conf. | whose words |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| contribution | contribution | contribution | the paper's words | |
| claim_type | method | claim_type | the paper's words | |
| phenomenon | substantial memory requirements of the GTDB-Tk classification toolkit caused by the growing GTDB bacterial reference tree | phenomenon | the paper's words | |
| concepts | GTDB-Tk also in: GTDB-Tk | concepts[0] | 0.85 | the paper's words |
| concepts | divide-and-conquer approach also in: divide-and-conquer approach | concepts[1] | 0.9 | the paper's words |
| concepts | class-level subtrees also in: class-level subtrees | concepts[2] | 0.9 | the paper's words |
| concepts | backbone tree also in: backbone tree | concepts[3] | 0.9 | the paper's words |
| concepts | lowest common ancestor also in: lowest common ancestor | concepts[4] | 0.9 | the paper's words |
| concepts | bacterial reference tree also in: bacterial reference tree | concepts[5] | 0.9 | the paper's words |
| concepts | relative evolutionary divergence (RED) | concepts[6] | 0.9 | the paper's words |
| concepts | maximum likelihood (ML) placement tool pplacer | concepts[7] | 0.9 | the paper's words |
| concepts | memory requirements also in: memory requirements | concepts[8] | 0.9 | the paper's words |
| concepts | query genomes also in: query genomes | concepts[9] | 0.9 | the paper's words |
| concepts | taxonomic rank also in: taxonomic rank | concepts[10] | 0.9 | the paper's words |
| concepts | GTDB reference packages also in: GTDB reference packages | concepts[11] | 0.9 | the paper's words |
| concepts | computing hardware also in: computing hardware | concepts[12] | 0.9 | the paper's words |
| senses | backbone tree — a tree containing one genome representative for each family | senses[0] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| claim_relations | extends → GTDB-Tk (previous version) | claim_relations[0] | 0.96 | the tagger's words |
| concept_edges | divide-and-conquer approach —causes→ memory requirements direction on the measure: reduces · strength of the relation: 0.96 · note: The sentence measures the reduction from approximately 320 GB to below 55 GB under the divide-and-conquer approach; the large quantified effect sets 0.96. also in: divide-and-conquer approach · memory requirements | concept_edges[0] | 0.99 | the tagger's words |
| concept_edges | class-level subtrees —part-of→ bacterial reference tree strength of the relation: 0.95 · note: The sentence says the bacterial reference tree is divided into class-level subtrees, directly licensing part-of; 0.95 reflects categorical structure without using a perfect weight. also in: class-level subtrees · bacterial reference tree | concept_edges[1] | 0.98 | the tagger's words |
| concept_edges | maximum likelihood (ML) placement tool pplacer —causes→ memory requirements strength of the relation: 0.97 · note: The sentence calls pplacer placement memory-intensive and measures approximately 320 GB of RAM, directly setting a high causal weight of 0.97.
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but the span writes 'memory-intensive operation requiring ~320 GB of RAM', not 'memory requirements'. | concept_edges[2] | 0.99 | the tagger's words |
| concept_edges | GTDB-Tk —operationalised-as→ divide-and-conquer approach strength of the relation: 0.97 · note: The contribution states that the GTDB-Tk update uses the divide-and-conquer approach and describes its two placements; this explicit implementation sets 0.97.
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its span and kept, but GTDB-Tk USES a divide-and-conquer approach; operationalised-as is the wrong type. also in: GTDB-Tk · divide-and-conquer approach | concept_edges[3] | 0.99 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | Here, we show that the memory requirements of GTDB-Tk are reduced by dividing the GTDB bacterial reference tree into class-level subtrees and demonstrate that taxonomic classifications are largely unimpacted by this change. | content_tags.findings[0] | 0.85 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | This substantially reduces the memory requirements of GTDB-Tk while having minimal impact on classification. | content_tags.findings[1] | 0.85 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | 3.2 Reduced memory requirements The divide-and-conquer approach implemented in GTDB-Tk v2 reduced the maximum memory requirements from ∼320 GB to <55 GB when run with the GTDB R07-RS207 reference trees. | content_tags.findings[2] | 0.85 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | If the genome is assigned to a class within this backbone tree, it is then placed into a class-level subtree to obtain a more refined placement for the genome. | content_tags.findings[3] | 0.85 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | A genome placed into a class-level subtree and assigned to a phylum belonging to one of the classes contained in the subtree is assigned the classification determined in the subtree. | content_tags.findings[4] | 0.85 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | Only 12 genomes (0.07%) did not have identical classifications between GTDB-Tk v1 and the divide-and-conquer approach used in GTDB-Tk v2 ( Supplementary Table S1 ). | content_tags.findings[5] | 0.85 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | 4 Summary GTDB-Tk v2 requires only a sixth of the memory of GTDB-Tk v1 while providing almost identical classifications. | content_tags.findings[6] | 0.85 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | ~320 GB RAM; reference tree of 62,291 genomes (printed '62 291') — reported sample, observation, or event count | content_tags.quantities[0] | 0.85 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | at most 10,540 genomes (printed '10 540'); 10% more than the Gammaproteobacteria — reported sample, observation, or event count | content_tags.quantities[1] | 0.85 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | ~60,000 genomes (printed '60 000') dereplicated to 23,548 (printed '23 548') — reported sample, observation, or event count | content_tags.quantities[2] | 0.85 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | 13 genomes (0.06%): 5 conflicting, 5 overclassified, 3 underclassified — reported sample, observation, or event count | content_tags.quantities[3] | 0.85 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | 22–35%; 1000; 1–64; >40%; 5000 — reported sample, observation, or event count | content_tags.quantities[4] | 0.85 | the tagger's words |
Tags that could not be placed in the text:
What was deliberately not tagged, and why, is recorded per paper by the tagger. Where a paper has no such record, this page says so rather than implying that nothing was declined.