Cargando…
The impact of amplification on differential expression analyses by RNA-seq
Currently, quantitative RNA-seq methods are pushed to work with increasingly small starting amounts of RNA that require amplification. However, it is unclear how much noise or bias amplification introduces and how this affects precision and accuracy of RNA quantification. To assess the effects of am...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4860583/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27156886 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep25533 |
_version_ | 1782431091119882240 |
---|---|
author | Parekh, Swati Ziegenhain, Christoph Vieth, Beate Enard, Wolfgang Hellmann, Ines |
author_facet | Parekh, Swati Ziegenhain, Christoph Vieth, Beate Enard, Wolfgang Hellmann, Ines |
author_sort | Parekh, Swati |
collection | PubMed |
description | Currently, quantitative RNA-seq methods are pushed to work with increasingly small starting amounts of RNA that require amplification. However, it is unclear how much noise or bias amplification introduces and how this affects precision and accuracy of RNA quantification. To assess the effects of amplification, reads that originated from the same RNA molecule (PCR-duplicates) need to be identified. Computationally, read duplicates are defined by their mapping position, which does not distinguish PCR- from natural duplicates and hence it is unclear how to treat duplicated reads. Here, we generate and analyse RNA-seq data sets prepared using three different protocols (Smart-Seq, TruSeq and UMI-seq). We find that a large fraction of computationally identified read duplicates are not PCR duplicates and can be explained by sampling and fragmentation bias. Consequently, the computational removal of duplicates does improve neither accuracy nor precision and can actually worsen the power and the False Discovery Rate (FDR) for differential gene expression. Even when duplicates are experimentally identified by unique molecular identifiers (UMIs), power and FDR are only mildly improved. However, the pooling of samples as made possible by the early barcoding of the UMI-protocol leads to an appreciable increase in the power to detect differentially expressed genes. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4860583 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-48605832016-05-20 The impact of amplification on differential expression analyses by RNA-seq Parekh, Swati Ziegenhain, Christoph Vieth, Beate Enard, Wolfgang Hellmann, Ines Sci Rep Article Currently, quantitative RNA-seq methods are pushed to work with increasingly small starting amounts of RNA that require amplification. However, it is unclear how much noise or bias amplification introduces and how this affects precision and accuracy of RNA quantification. To assess the effects of amplification, reads that originated from the same RNA molecule (PCR-duplicates) need to be identified. Computationally, read duplicates are defined by their mapping position, which does not distinguish PCR- from natural duplicates and hence it is unclear how to treat duplicated reads. Here, we generate and analyse RNA-seq data sets prepared using three different protocols (Smart-Seq, TruSeq and UMI-seq). We find that a large fraction of computationally identified read duplicates are not PCR duplicates and can be explained by sampling and fragmentation bias. Consequently, the computational removal of duplicates does improve neither accuracy nor precision and can actually worsen the power and the False Discovery Rate (FDR) for differential gene expression. Even when duplicates are experimentally identified by unique molecular identifiers (UMIs), power and FDR are only mildly improved. However, the pooling of samples as made possible by the early barcoding of the UMI-protocol leads to an appreciable increase in the power to detect differentially expressed genes. Nature Publishing Group 2016-05-09 /pmc/articles/PMC4860583/ /pubmed/27156886 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep25533 Text en Copyright © 2016, Macmillan Publishers Limited http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Article Parekh, Swati Ziegenhain, Christoph Vieth, Beate Enard, Wolfgang Hellmann, Ines The impact of amplification on differential expression analyses by RNA-seq |
title | The impact of amplification on differential expression analyses by RNA-seq |
title_full | The impact of amplification on differential expression analyses by RNA-seq |
title_fullStr | The impact of amplification on differential expression analyses by RNA-seq |
title_full_unstemmed | The impact of amplification on differential expression analyses by RNA-seq |
title_short | The impact of amplification on differential expression analyses by RNA-seq |
title_sort | impact of amplification on differential expression analyses by rna-seq |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4860583/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27156886 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep25533 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT parekhswati theimpactofamplificationondifferentialexpressionanalysesbyrnaseq AT ziegenhainchristoph theimpactofamplificationondifferentialexpressionanalysesbyrnaseq AT viethbeate theimpactofamplificationondifferentialexpressionanalysesbyrnaseq AT enardwolfgang theimpactofamplificationondifferentialexpressionanalysesbyrnaseq AT hellmannines theimpactofamplificationondifferentialexpressionanalysesbyrnaseq AT parekhswati impactofamplificationondifferentialexpressionanalysesbyrnaseq AT ziegenhainchristoph impactofamplificationondifferentialexpressionanalysesbyrnaseq AT viethbeate impactofamplificationondifferentialexpressionanalysesbyrnaseq AT enardwolfgang impactofamplificationondifferentialexpressionanalysesbyrnaseq AT hellmannines impactofamplificationondifferentialexpressionanalysesbyrnaseq |