Cargando…

Fully automated sequence alignment methods are comparable to, and much faster than, traditional methods in large data sets: an example with hepatitis B virus

Aligning sequences for phylogenetic analysis (multiple sequence alignment; MSA) is an important, but increasingly computationally expensive step with the recent surge in DNA sequence data. Much of this sequence data is publicly available, but can be extremely fragmentary (i.e., a combination of full...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Catanach, Therese A., Sweet, Andrew D., Nguyen, Nam-phuong D., Peery, Rhiannon M., Debevec, Andrew H., Thomer, Andrea K., Owings, Amanda C., Boyd, Bret M., Katz, Aron D., Soto-Adames, Felipe N., Allen, Julie M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: PeerJ Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6321758/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30627489
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.6142
_version_ 1783385516221136896
author Catanach, Therese A.
Sweet, Andrew D.
Nguyen, Nam-phuong D.
Peery, Rhiannon M.
Debevec, Andrew H.
Thomer, Andrea K.
Owings, Amanda C.
Boyd, Bret M.
Katz, Aron D.
Soto-Adames, Felipe N.
Allen, Julie M.
author_facet Catanach, Therese A.
Sweet, Andrew D.
Nguyen, Nam-phuong D.
Peery, Rhiannon M.
Debevec, Andrew H.
Thomer, Andrea K.
Owings, Amanda C.
Boyd, Bret M.
Katz, Aron D.
Soto-Adames, Felipe N.
Allen, Julie M.
author_sort Catanach, Therese A.
collection PubMed
description Aligning sequences for phylogenetic analysis (multiple sequence alignment; MSA) is an important, but increasingly computationally expensive step with the recent surge in DNA sequence data. Much of this sequence data is publicly available, but can be extremely fragmentary (i.e., a combination of full genomes and genomic fragments), which can compound the computational issues related to MSA. Traditionally, alignments are produced with automated algorithms and then checked and/or corrected “by eye” prior to phylogenetic inference. However, this manual curation is inefficient at the data scales required of modern phylogenetics and results in alignments that are not reproducible. Recently, methods have been developed for fully automating alignments of large data sets, but it is unclear if these methods produce alignments that result in compatible phylogenies when compared to more traditional alignment approaches that combined automated and manual methods. Here we use approximately 33,000 publicly available sequences from the hepatitis B virus (HBV), a globally distributed and rapidly evolving virus, to compare different alignment approaches. Using one data set comprised exclusively of whole genomes and a second that also included sequence fragments, we compared three MSA methods: (1) a purely automated approach using traditional software, (2) an automated approach including by eye manual editing, and (3) more recent fully automated approaches. To understand how these methods affect phylogenetic results, we compared resulting tree topologies based on these different alignment methods using multiple metrics. We further determined if the monophyly of existing HBV genotypes was supported in phylogenies estimated from each alignment type and under different statistical support thresholds. Traditional and fully automated alignments produced similar HBV phylogenies. Although there was variability between branch support thresholds, allowing lower support thresholds tended to result in more differences among trees. Therefore, differences between the trees could be best explained by phylogenetic uncertainty unrelated to the MSA method used. Nevertheless, automated alignment approaches did not require human intervention and were therefore considerably less time-intensive than traditional approaches. Because of this, we conclude that fully automated algorithms for MSA are fully compatible with older methods even in extremely difficult to align data sets. Additionally, we found that most HBV diagnostic genotypes did not correspond to evolutionarily-sound groups, regardless of alignment type and support threshold. This suggests there may be errors in genotype classification in the database or that HBV genotypes may need a revision.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6321758
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher PeerJ Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63217582019-01-09 Fully automated sequence alignment methods are comparable to, and much faster than, traditional methods in large data sets: an example with hepatitis B virus Catanach, Therese A. Sweet, Andrew D. Nguyen, Nam-phuong D. Peery, Rhiannon M. Debevec, Andrew H. Thomer, Andrea K. Owings, Amanda C. Boyd, Bret M. Katz, Aron D. Soto-Adames, Felipe N. Allen, Julie M. PeerJ Bioinformatics Aligning sequences for phylogenetic analysis (multiple sequence alignment; MSA) is an important, but increasingly computationally expensive step with the recent surge in DNA sequence data. Much of this sequence data is publicly available, but can be extremely fragmentary (i.e., a combination of full genomes and genomic fragments), which can compound the computational issues related to MSA. Traditionally, alignments are produced with automated algorithms and then checked and/or corrected “by eye” prior to phylogenetic inference. However, this manual curation is inefficient at the data scales required of modern phylogenetics and results in alignments that are not reproducible. Recently, methods have been developed for fully automating alignments of large data sets, but it is unclear if these methods produce alignments that result in compatible phylogenies when compared to more traditional alignment approaches that combined automated and manual methods. Here we use approximately 33,000 publicly available sequences from the hepatitis B virus (HBV), a globally distributed and rapidly evolving virus, to compare different alignment approaches. Using one data set comprised exclusively of whole genomes and a second that also included sequence fragments, we compared three MSA methods: (1) a purely automated approach using traditional software, (2) an automated approach including by eye manual editing, and (3) more recent fully automated approaches. To understand how these methods affect phylogenetic results, we compared resulting tree topologies based on these different alignment methods using multiple metrics. We further determined if the monophyly of existing HBV genotypes was supported in phylogenies estimated from each alignment type and under different statistical support thresholds. Traditional and fully automated alignments produced similar HBV phylogenies. Although there was variability between branch support thresholds, allowing lower support thresholds tended to result in more differences among trees. Therefore, differences between the trees could be best explained by phylogenetic uncertainty unrelated to the MSA method used. Nevertheless, automated alignment approaches did not require human intervention and were therefore considerably less time-intensive than traditional approaches. Because of this, we conclude that fully automated algorithms for MSA are fully compatible with older methods even in extremely difficult to align data sets. Additionally, we found that most HBV diagnostic genotypes did not correspond to evolutionarily-sound groups, regardless of alignment type and support threshold. This suggests there may be errors in genotype classification in the database or that HBV genotypes may need a revision. PeerJ Inc. 2019-01-03 /pmc/articles/PMC6321758/ /pubmed/30627489 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.6142 Text en ©2019 Catanach et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited.
spellingShingle Bioinformatics
Catanach, Therese A.
Sweet, Andrew D.
Nguyen, Nam-phuong D.
Peery, Rhiannon M.
Debevec, Andrew H.
Thomer, Andrea K.
Owings, Amanda C.
Boyd, Bret M.
Katz, Aron D.
Soto-Adames, Felipe N.
Allen, Julie M.
Fully automated sequence alignment methods are comparable to, and much faster than, traditional methods in large data sets: an example with hepatitis B virus
title Fully automated sequence alignment methods are comparable to, and much faster than, traditional methods in large data sets: an example with hepatitis B virus
title_full Fully automated sequence alignment methods are comparable to, and much faster than, traditional methods in large data sets: an example with hepatitis B virus
title_fullStr Fully automated sequence alignment methods are comparable to, and much faster than, traditional methods in large data sets: an example with hepatitis B virus
title_full_unstemmed Fully automated sequence alignment methods are comparable to, and much faster than, traditional methods in large data sets: an example with hepatitis B virus
title_short Fully automated sequence alignment methods are comparable to, and much faster than, traditional methods in large data sets: an example with hepatitis B virus
title_sort fully automated sequence alignment methods are comparable to, and much faster than, traditional methods in large data sets: an example with hepatitis b virus
topic Bioinformatics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6321758/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30627489
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.6142
work_keys_str_mv AT catanachtheresea fullyautomatedsequencealignmentmethodsarecomparabletoandmuchfasterthantraditionalmethodsinlargedatasetsanexamplewithhepatitisbvirus
AT sweetandrewd fullyautomatedsequencealignmentmethodsarecomparabletoandmuchfasterthantraditionalmethodsinlargedatasetsanexamplewithhepatitisbvirus
AT nguyennamphuongd fullyautomatedsequencealignmentmethodsarecomparabletoandmuchfasterthantraditionalmethodsinlargedatasetsanexamplewithhepatitisbvirus
AT peeryrhiannonm fullyautomatedsequencealignmentmethodsarecomparabletoandmuchfasterthantraditionalmethodsinlargedatasetsanexamplewithhepatitisbvirus
AT debevecandrewh fullyautomatedsequencealignmentmethodsarecomparabletoandmuchfasterthantraditionalmethodsinlargedatasetsanexamplewithhepatitisbvirus
AT thomerandreak fullyautomatedsequencealignmentmethodsarecomparabletoandmuchfasterthantraditionalmethodsinlargedatasetsanexamplewithhepatitisbvirus
AT owingsamandac fullyautomatedsequencealignmentmethodsarecomparabletoandmuchfasterthantraditionalmethodsinlargedatasetsanexamplewithhepatitisbvirus
AT boydbretm fullyautomatedsequencealignmentmethodsarecomparabletoandmuchfasterthantraditionalmethodsinlargedatasetsanexamplewithhepatitisbvirus
AT katzarond fullyautomatedsequencealignmentmethodsarecomparabletoandmuchfasterthantraditionalmethodsinlargedatasetsanexamplewithhepatitisbvirus
AT sotoadamesfelipen fullyautomatedsequencealignmentmethodsarecomparabletoandmuchfasterthantraditionalmethodsinlargedatasetsanexamplewithhepatitisbvirus
AT allenjuliem fullyautomatedsequencealignmentmethodsarecomparabletoandmuchfasterthantraditionalmethodsinlargedatasetsanexamplewithhepatitisbvirus