Large-scale benchmarking of prokaryotic annotation tools across thousands of species
TL;DR
This study presents the first large-scale investigation of four prominent open-source annotation tools (Prokka, Bakta, EggNOG-mapper, and PGAP) across 156,033 diverse genomes, highlighting tool-specific strengths crucial for selecting optimal solutions based on genome quality, taxonomy, and origin.
Abstract
Genome annotation is an important step in deriving functional meaning from prokaryotic sequencing data, yet systematic evaluations guiding tool selection are lacking. We present the first large-scale investigation of four prominent open-source annotation tools (Prokka, Bakta, EggNOG-mapper, and PGAP) across 156,033 diverse genomes. This includes Escherichia coli strains for baseline performance, thousands of archaea and bacteria genomes, as well as frameshifted and metagenome-assembled genomes. Bakta excels in annotating high-quality bacterial genomes, while PGAP was better for archaeal genomes and challenging bacterial assemblies, including metagenome-assembled, fragmented, or contaminated samples. For Gene Ontology annotation, PGAP consistently provides broader term coverage, whereas EggNOG-mapper offers more terms per feature. Our findings highlight tool-specific strengths crucial for selecting optimal solutions based on genome quality, taxonomy, and origin (e.g. MAGs). This study provides an evidence-based guide for users and informs future tool development.