Cargando…

Comparison of three microarray probe annotation pipelines: differences in strategies and their effect on downstream analysis

BACKGROUND: Reliable annotation linking oligonucleotide probes to target genes is essential for functional biological analysis of microarray experiments. We used the IMAD, OligoRAP and sigReannot pipelines to update the annotation for the ARK-Genomics Chicken 20 K array as part of a joined EADGENE/S...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Neerincx, Pieter BT, Casel, Pierrot, Prickett, Dennis, Nie, Haisheng, Watson, Michael, Leunissen, Jack AM, Groenen, Martien AM, Klopp, Christophe
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2712739/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19615109
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1753-6561-3-S4-S1
_version_ 1782169523080658944
author Neerincx, Pieter BT
Casel, Pierrot
Prickett, Dennis
Nie, Haisheng
Watson, Michael
Leunissen, Jack AM
Groenen, Martien AM
Klopp, Christophe
author_facet Neerincx, Pieter BT
Casel, Pierrot
Prickett, Dennis
Nie, Haisheng
Watson, Michael
Leunissen, Jack AM
Groenen, Martien AM
Klopp, Christophe
author_sort Neerincx, Pieter BT
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Reliable annotation linking oligonucleotide probes to target genes is essential for functional biological analysis of microarray experiments. We used the IMAD, OligoRAP and sigReannot pipelines to update the annotation for the ARK-Genomics Chicken 20 K array as part of a joined EADGENE/SABRE workshop. In this manuscript we compare their annotation strategies and results. Furthermore, we analyse the effect of differences in updated annotation on functional analysis for an experiment involving Eimeria infected chickens and finally we propose guidelines for optimal annotation strategies. RESULTS: IMAD, OligoRAP and sigReannot update both annotation and estimated target specificity. The 3 pipelines can assign oligos to target specificity categories although with varying degrees of resolution. Target specificity is judged based on the amount and type of oligo versus target-gene alignments (hits), which are determined by filter thresholds that users can adjust based on their experimental conditions. Linking oligos to annotation on the other hand is based on rigid rules, which differ between pipelines. For 52.7% of the oligos from a subset selected for in depth comparison all pipelines linked to one or more Ensembl genes with consensus on 44.0%. In 31.0% of the cases none of the pipelines could assign an Ensembl gene to an oligo and for the remaining 16.3% the coverage differed between pipelines. Differences in updated annotation were mainly due to different thresholds for hybridisation potential filtering of oligo versus target-gene alignments and different policies for expanding annotation using indirect links. The differences in updated annotation packages had a significant effect on GO term enrichment analysis with consensus on only 67.2% of the enriched terms. CONCLUSION: In addition to flexible thresholds to determine target specificity, annotation tools should provide metadata describing the relationships between oligos and the annotation assigned to them. These relationships can then be used to judge the varying degrees of reliability allowing users to fine-tune the balance between reliability and coverage. This is important as it can have a significant effect on functional microarray analysis as exemplified by the lack of consensus on almost one third of the terms found with GO term enrichment analysis based on updated IMAD, OligoRAP or sigReannot annotation.
format Text
id pubmed-2712739
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-27127392009-07-20 Comparison of three microarray probe annotation pipelines: differences in strategies and their effect on downstream analysis Neerincx, Pieter BT Casel, Pierrot Prickett, Dennis Nie, Haisheng Watson, Michael Leunissen, Jack AM Groenen, Martien AM Klopp, Christophe BMC Proc Research BACKGROUND: Reliable annotation linking oligonucleotide probes to target genes is essential for functional biological analysis of microarray experiments. We used the IMAD, OligoRAP and sigReannot pipelines to update the annotation for the ARK-Genomics Chicken 20 K array as part of a joined EADGENE/SABRE workshop. In this manuscript we compare their annotation strategies and results. Furthermore, we analyse the effect of differences in updated annotation on functional analysis for an experiment involving Eimeria infected chickens and finally we propose guidelines for optimal annotation strategies. RESULTS: IMAD, OligoRAP and sigReannot update both annotation and estimated target specificity. The 3 pipelines can assign oligos to target specificity categories although with varying degrees of resolution. Target specificity is judged based on the amount and type of oligo versus target-gene alignments (hits), which are determined by filter thresholds that users can adjust based on their experimental conditions. Linking oligos to annotation on the other hand is based on rigid rules, which differ between pipelines. For 52.7% of the oligos from a subset selected for in depth comparison all pipelines linked to one or more Ensembl genes with consensus on 44.0%. In 31.0% of the cases none of the pipelines could assign an Ensembl gene to an oligo and for the remaining 16.3% the coverage differed between pipelines. Differences in updated annotation were mainly due to different thresholds for hybridisation potential filtering of oligo versus target-gene alignments and different policies for expanding annotation using indirect links. The differences in updated annotation packages had a significant effect on GO term enrichment analysis with consensus on only 67.2% of the enriched terms. CONCLUSION: In addition to flexible thresholds to determine target specificity, annotation tools should provide metadata describing the relationships between oligos and the annotation assigned to them. These relationships can then be used to judge the varying degrees of reliability allowing users to fine-tune the balance between reliability and coverage. This is important as it can have a significant effect on functional microarray analysis as exemplified by the lack of consensus on almost one third of the terms found with GO term enrichment analysis based on updated IMAD, OligoRAP or sigReannot annotation. BioMed Central 2009-07-16 /pmc/articles/PMC2712739/ /pubmed/19615109 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1753-6561-3-S4-S1 Text en Copyright © 2009 Neerincx et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Neerincx, Pieter BT
Casel, Pierrot
Prickett, Dennis
Nie, Haisheng
Watson, Michael
Leunissen, Jack AM
Groenen, Martien AM
Klopp, Christophe
Comparison of three microarray probe annotation pipelines: differences in strategies and their effect on downstream analysis
title Comparison of three microarray probe annotation pipelines: differences in strategies and their effect on downstream analysis
title_full Comparison of three microarray probe annotation pipelines: differences in strategies and their effect on downstream analysis
title_fullStr Comparison of three microarray probe annotation pipelines: differences in strategies and their effect on downstream analysis
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of three microarray probe annotation pipelines: differences in strategies and their effect on downstream analysis
title_short Comparison of three microarray probe annotation pipelines: differences in strategies and their effect on downstream analysis
title_sort comparison of three microarray probe annotation pipelines: differences in strategies and their effect on downstream analysis
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2712739/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19615109
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1753-6561-3-S4-S1
work_keys_str_mv AT neerincxpieterbt comparisonofthreemicroarrayprobeannotationpipelinesdifferencesinstrategiesandtheireffectondownstreamanalysis
AT caselpierrot comparisonofthreemicroarrayprobeannotationpipelinesdifferencesinstrategiesandtheireffectondownstreamanalysis
AT prickettdennis comparisonofthreemicroarrayprobeannotationpipelinesdifferencesinstrategiesandtheireffectondownstreamanalysis
AT niehaisheng comparisonofthreemicroarrayprobeannotationpipelinesdifferencesinstrategiesandtheireffectondownstreamanalysis
AT watsonmichael comparisonofthreemicroarrayprobeannotationpipelinesdifferencesinstrategiesandtheireffectondownstreamanalysis
AT leunissenjackam comparisonofthreemicroarrayprobeannotationpipelinesdifferencesinstrategiesandtheireffectondownstreamanalysis
AT groenenmartienam comparisonofthreemicroarrayprobeannotationpipelinesdifferencesinstrategiesandtheireffectondownstreamanalysis
AT kloppchristophe comparisonofthreemicroarrayprobeannotationpipelinesdifferencesinstrategiesandtheireffectondownstreamanalysis