Cargando…
Transcript Assembly and Annotations: Bias and Adjustment
MOTIVATION. Transcript annotations play a critical role in gene expression analysis as they serve as a reference for quantifying isoform-level expression. The two main sources of annotations are RefSeq and Ensembl/GENCODE, but discrepancies between their methodologies and information resources can l...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10153229/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37131680 http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2023.04.20.537700 |
_version_ | 1785035892098859008 |
---|---|
author | Zhang, Qimin Shao, Mingfu |
author_facet | Zhang, Qimin Shao, Mingfu |
author_sort | Zhang, Qimin |
collection | PubMed |
description | MOTIVATION. Transcript annotations play a critical role in gene expression analysis as they serve as a reference for quantifying isoform-level expression. The two main sources of annotations are RefSeq and Ensembl/GENCODE, but discrepancies between their methodologies and information resources can lead to significant differences. It has been demonstrated that the choice of annotation can have a significant impact on gene expression analysis. Furthermore, transcript assembly is closely linked to annotations, as assembling large-scale available RNA-seq data is an effective data-driven way to construct annotations, and annotations are often served as benchmarks to evaluate the accuracy of assembly methods. However, the influence of different annotations on transcript assembly is not yet fully understood. RESULTS. We investigate the impact of annotations on transcript assembly. We observe that conflicting conclusions can arise when evaluating assemblers with different annotations. To understand this striking phenomenon, we compare the structural similarity of annotations at various levels and find that the primary structural difference across annotations occurs at the intron-chain level. Next, we examine the biotypes of annotated and assembled transcripts and uncover a significant bias towards annotating and assembling transcripts with intron retentions, which explains above the contradictory conclusions. We develop a standalone tool, available at https://github.com/Shao-Group/irtool, that can be combined with an assembler to generate an assembly without intron retentions. We evaluate the performance of such a pipeline and offer guidance to select appropriate assembling tools for different application scenarios. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10153229 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-101532292023-05-03 Transcript Assembly and Annotations: Bias and Adjustment Zhang, Qimin Shao, Mingfu bioRxiv Article MOTIVATION. Transcript annotations play a critical role in gene expression analysis as they serve as a reference for quantifying isoform-level expression. The two main sources of annotations are RefSeq and Ensembl/GENCODE, but discrepancies between their methodologies and information resources can lead to significant differences. It has been demonstrated that the choice of annotation can have a significant impact on gene expression analysis. Furthermore, transcript assembly is closely linked to annotations, as assembling large-scale available RNA-seq data is an effective data-driven way to construct annotations, and annotations are often served as benchmarks to evaluate the accuracy of assembly methods. However, the influence of different annotations on transcript assembly is not yet fully understood. RESULTS. We investigate the impact of annotations on transcript assembly. We observe that conflicting conclusions can arise when evaluating assemblers with different annotations. To understand this striking phenomenon, we compare the structural similarity of annotations at various levels and find that the primary structural difference across annotations occurs at the intron-chain level. Next, we examine the biotypes of annotated and assembled transcripts and uncover a significant bias towards annotating and assembling transcripts with intron retentions, which explains above the contradictory conclusions. We develop a standalone tool, available at https://github.com/Shao-Group/irtool, that can be combined with an assembler to generate an assembly without intron retentions. We evaluate the performance of such a pipeline and offer guidance to select appropriate assembling tools for different application scenarios. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory 2023-04-21 /pmc/articles/PMC10153229/ /pubmed/37131680 http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2023.04.20.537700 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which allows reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format, so long as attribution is given to the creator. The license allows for commercial use. |
spellingShingle | Article Zhang, Qimin Shao, Mingfu Transcript Assembly and Annotations: Bias and Adjustment |
title | Transcript Assembly and Annotations: Bias and Adjustment |
title_full | Transcript Assembly and Annotations: Bias and Adjustment |
title_fullStr | Transcript Assembly and Annotations: Bias and Adjustment |
title_full_unstemmed | Transcript Assembly and Annotations: Bias and Adjustment |
title_short | Transcript Assembly and Annotations: Bias and Adjustment |
title_sort | transcript assembly and annotations: bias and adjustment |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10153229/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37131680 http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2023.04.20.537700 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zhangqimin transcriptassemblyandannotationsbiasandadjustment AT shaomingfu transcriptassemblyandannotationsbiasandadjustment |