Cargando…

Analysis and correction of compositional bias in sparse sequencing count data

BACKGROUND: Count data derived from high-throughput deoxy-ribonucliec acid (DNA) sequencing is frequently used in quantitative molecular assays. Due to properties inherent to the sequencing process, unnormalized count data is compositional, measuring relative and not absolute abundances of the assay...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kumar, M. Senthil, Slud, Eric V., Okrah, Kwame, Hicks, Stephanie C., Hannenhalli, Sridhar, Corrada Bravo, Héctor
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6219007/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30400812
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12864-018-5160-5
_version_ 1783368563750338560
author Kumar, M. Senthil
Slud, Eric V.
Okrah, Kwame
Hicks, Stephanie C.
Hannenhalli, Sridhar
Corrada Bravo, Héctor
author_facet Kumar, M. Senthil
Slud, Eric V.
Okrah, Kwame
Hicks, Stephanie C.
Hannenhalli, Sridhar
Corrada Bravo, Héctor
author_sort Kumar, M. Senthil
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Count data derived from high-throughput deoxy-ribonucliec acid (DNA) sequencing is frequently used in quantitative molecular assays. Due to properties inherent to the sequencing process, unnormalized count data is compositional, measuring relative and not absolute abundances of the assayed features. This compositional bias confounds inference of absolute abundances. Commonly used count data normalization approaches like library size scaling/rarefaction/subsampling cannot correct for compositional or any other relevant technical bias that is uncorrelated with library size. RESULTS: We demonstrate that existing techniques for estimating compositional bias fail with sparse metagenomic 16S count data and propose an empirical Bayes normalization approach to overcome this problem. In addition, we clarify the assumptions underlying frequently used scaling normalization methods in light of compositional bias, including scaling methods that were not designed directly to address it. CONCLUSIONS: Compositional bias, induced by the sequencing machine, confounds inferences of absolute abundances. We present a normalization technique for compositional bias correction in sparse sequencing count data, and demonstrate its improved performance in metagenomic 16s survey data. Based on the distribution of technical bias estimates arising from several publicly available large scale 16s count datasets, we argue that detailed experiments specifically addressing the influence of compositional bias in metagenomics are needed. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12864-018-5160-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6219007
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62190072018-11-08 Analysis and correction of compositional bias in sparse sequencing count data Kumar, M. Senthil Slud, Eric V. Okrah, Kwame Hicks, Stephanie C. Hannenhalli, Sridhar Corrada Bravo, Héctor BMC Genomics Methodology Article BACKGROUND: Count data derived from high-throughput deoxy-ribonucliec acid (DNA) sequencing is frequently used in quantitative molecular assays. Due to properties inherent to the sequencing process, unnormalized count data is compositional, measuring relative and not absolute abundances of the assayed features. This compositional bias confounds inference of absolute abundances. Commonly used count data normalization approaches like library size scaling/rarefaction/subsampling cannot correct for compositional or any other relevant technical bias that is uncorrelated with library size. RESULTS: We demonstrate that existing techniques for estimating compositional bias fail with sparse metagenomic 16S count data and propose an empirical Bayes normalization approach to overcome this problem. In addition, we clarify the assumptions underlying frequently used scaling normalization methods in light of compositional bias, including scaling methods that were not designed directly to address it. CONCLUSIONS: Compositional bias, induced by the sequencing machine, confounds inferences of absolute abundances. We present a normalization technique for compositional bias correction in sparse sequencing count data, and demonstrate its improved performance in metagenomic 16s survey data. Based on the distribution of technical bias estimates arising from several publicly available large scale 16s count datasets, we argue that detailed experiments specifically addressing the influence of compositional bias in metagenomics are needed. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12864-018-5160-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-11-06 /pmc/articles/PMC6219007/ /pubmed/30400812 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12864-018-5160-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Methodology Article
Kumar, M. Senthil
Slud, Eric V.
Okrah, Kwame
Hicks, Stephanie C.
Hannenhalli, Sridhar
Corrada Bravo, Héctor
Analysis and correction of compositional bias in sparse sequencing count data
title Analysis and correction of compositional bias in sparse sequencing count data
title_full Analysis and correction of compositional bias in sparse sequencing count data
title_fullStr Analysis and correction of compositional bias in sparse sequencing count data
title_full_unstemmed Analysis and correction of compositional bias in sparse sequencing count data
title_short Analysis and correction of compositional bias in sparse sequencing count data
title_sort analysis and correction of compositional bias in sparse sequencing count data
topic Methodology Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6219007/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30400812
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12864-018-5160-5
work_keys_str_mv AT kumarmsenthil analysisandcorrectionofcompositionalbiasinsparsesequencingcountdata
AT sludericv analysisandcorrectionofcompositionalbiasinsparsesequencingcountdata
AT okrahkwame analysisandcorrectionofcompositionalbiasinsparsesequencingcountdata
AT hicksstephaniec analysisandcorrectionofcompositionalbiasinsparsesequencingcountdata
AT hannenhallisridhar analysisandcorrectionofcompositionalbiasinsparsesequencingcountdata
AT corradabravohector analysisandcorrectionofcompositionalbiasinsparsesequencingcountdata