Cargando…

Comparison of methylation estimates obtained via MinION nanopore sequencing and sanger bisulfite sequencing in the TRPA1 promoter region

BACKGROUND: Bisulfite sequencing has long been considered the gold standard for measuring DNA methylation at single CpG resolution. However, in recent years several new approaches like nanopore sequencing have been developed due to hints for a partial error-proneness of bisulfite sequencing. Since t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gombert, Sara, Jahn, Kirsten, Pathak, Hansi, Burkert, Alexandra, Schmidt, Gunnar, Wiehlmann, Lutz, Davenport, Colin, Brändl, Björn, Müller, Franz-Josef, Leffler, Andreas, Deest, Maximilian, Frieling, Helge
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10591399/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37872581
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12920-023-01694-6
_version_ 1785124214635757568
author Gombert, Sara
Jahn, Kirsten
Pathak, Hansi
Burkert, Alexandra
Schmidt, Gunnar
Wiehlmann, Lutz
Davenport, Colin
Brändl, Björn
Müller, Franz-Josef
Leffler, Andreas
Deest, Maximilian
Frieling, Helge
author_facet Gombert, Sara
Jahn, Kirsten
Pathak, Hansi
Burkert, Alexandra
Schmidt, Gunnar
Wiehlmann, Lutz
Davenport, Colin
Brändl, Björn
Müller, Franz-Josef
Leffler, Andreas
Deest, Maximilian
Frieling, Helge
author_sort Gombert, Sara
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Bisulfite sequencing has long been considered the gold standard for measuring DNA methylation at single CpG resolution. However, in recent years several new approaches like nanopore sequencing have been developed due to hints for a partial error-proneness of bisulfite sequencing. Since these errors were shown to be sequence-specific, we aimed to verify the methylation data of a particular region of the TRPA1 promoter from our previous studies obtained by bisulfite sequencing. METHODS: We compared methylation rates determined by direct bisulfite sequencing and nanopore sequencing following Cas9-mediated PCR-free enrichment. RESULTS: We could show that CpG methylation levels above 20% corroborate well with our previous data. Within the range between 0 and 20% methylation, however, Sanger sequencing data have to be interpreted cautiously, at least in the investigated region of interest (TRPA1 promotor region). CONCLUSION: Based on the investigation of the TRPA1- region as an example, the present work can help in choosing the right method out of the two current main approaches for methylation analysis for different individual settings regarding many factors like cohort size, costs and prerequisites that should be fulfilled for each method. All in all, both methods have their raison d’être. Furthermore, the present paper contains and illustrates some important basic information and explanation of how guide RNAs should be located for an optimal outcome in Cas9 mediated PCR free target enrichment. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12920-023-01694-6.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10591399
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105913992023-10-24 Comparison of methylation estimates obtained via MinION nanopore sequencing and sanger bisulfite sequencing in the TRPA1 promoter region Gombert, Sara Jahn, Kirsten Pathak, Hansi Burkert, Alexandra Schmidt, Gunnar Wiehlmann, Lutz Davenport, Colin Brändl, Björn Müller, Franz-Josef Leffler, Andreas Deest, Maximilian Frieling, Helge BMC Med Genomics Research BACKGROUND: Bisulfite sequencing has long been considered the gold standard for measuring DNA methylation at single CpG resolution. However, in recent years several new approaches like nanopore sequencing have been developed due to hints for a partial error-proneness of bisulfite sequencing. Since these errors were shown to be sequence-specific, we aimed to verify the methylation data of a particular region of the TRPA1 promoter from our previous studies obtained by bisulfite sequencing. METHODS: We compared methylation rates determined by direct bisulfite sequencing and nanopore sequencing following Cas9-mediated PCR-free enrichment. RESULTS: We could show that CpG methylation levels above 20% corroborate well with our previous data. Within the range between 0 and 20% methylation, however, Sanger sequencing data have to be interpreted cautiously, at least in the investigated region of interest (TRPA1 promotor region). CONCLUSION: Based on the investigation of the TRPA1- region as an example, the present work can help in choosing the right method out of the two current main approaches for methylation analysis for different individual settings regarding many factors like cohort size, costs and prerequisites that should be fulfilled for each method. All in all, both methods have their raison d’être. Furthermore, the present paper contains and illustrates some important basic information and explanation of how guide RNAs should be located for an optimal outcome in Cas9 mediated PCR free target enrichment. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12920-023-01694-6. BioMed Central 2023-10-23 /pmc/articles/PMC10591399/ /pubmed/37872581 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12920-023-01694-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Gombert, Sara
Jahn, Kirsten
Pathak, Hansi
Burkert, Alexandra
Schmidt, Gunnar
Wiehlmann, Lutz
Davenport, Colin
Brändl, Björn
Müller, Franz-Josef
Leffler, Andreas
Deest, Maximilian
Frieling, Helge
Comparison of methylation estimates obtained via MinION nanopore sequencing and sanger bisulfite sequencing in the TRPA1 promoter region
title Comparison of methylation estimates obtained via MinION nanopore sequencing and sanger bisulfite sequencing in the TRPA1 promoter region
title_full Comparison of methylation estimates obtained via MinION nanopore sequencing and sanger bisulfite sequencing in the TRPA1 promoter region
title_fullStr Comparison of methylation estimates obtained via MinION nanopore sequencing and sanger bisulfite sequencing in the TRPA1 promoter region
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of methylation estimates obtained via MinION nanopore sequencing and sanger bisulfite sequencing in the TRPA1 promoter region
title_short Comparison of methylation estimates obtained via MinION nanopore sequencing and sanger bisulfite sequencing in the TRPA1 promoter region
title_sort comparison of methylation estimates obtained via minion nanopore sequencing and sanger bisulfite sequencing in the trpa1 promoter region
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10591399/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37872581
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12920-023-01694-6
work_keys_str_mv AT gombertsara comparisonofmethylationestimatesobtainedviaminionnanoporesequencingandsangerbisulfitesequencinginthetrpa1promoterregion
AT jahnkirsten comparisonofmethylationestimatesobtainedviaminionnanoporesequencingandsangerbisulfitesequencinginthetrpa1promoterregion
AT pathakhansi comparisonofmethylationestimatesobtainedviaminionnanoporesequencingandsangerbisulfitesequencinginthetrpa1promoterregion
AT burkertalexandra comparisonofmethylationestimatesobtainedviaminionnanoporesequencingandsangerbisulfitesequencinginthetrpa1promoterregion
AT schmidtgunnar comparisonofmethylationestimatesobtainedviaminionnanoporesequencingandsangerbisulfitesequencinginthetrpa1promoterregion
AT wiehlmannlutz comparisonofmethylationestimatesobtainedviaminionnanoporesequencingandsangerbisulfitesequencinginthetrpa1promoterregion
AT davenportcolin comparisonofmethylationestimatesobtainedviaminionnanoporesequencingandsangerbisulfitesequencinginthetrpa1promoterregion
AT brandlbjorn comparisonofmethylationestimatesobtainedviaminionnanoporesequencingandsangerbisulfitesequencinginthetrpa1promoterregion
AT mullerfranzjosef comparisonofmethylationestimatesobtainedviaminionnanoporesequencingandsangerbisulfitesequencinginthetrpa1promoterregion
AT lefflerandreas comparisonofmethylationestimatesobtainedviaminionnanoporesequencingandsangerbisulfitesequencinginthetrpa1promoterregion
AT deestmaximilian comparisonofmethylationestimatesobtainedviaminionnanoporesequencingandsangerbisulfitesequencinginthetrpa1promoterregion
AT frielinghelge comparisonofmethylationestimatesobtainedviaminionnanoporesequencingandsangerbisulfitesequencinginthetrpa1promoterregion