Cargando…

Systematic evaluation of RNA-Seq preparation protocol performance

BACKGROUND: RNA-Seq is currently the most widely used tool to analyze whole-transcriptome profiles. There are numerous commercial kits available to facilitate preparing RNA-Seq libraries; however, it is still not clear how some of these kits perform in terms of: 1) ribosomal RNA removal; 2) read cov...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chao, Hsueh-Ping, Chen, Yueping, Takata, Yoko, Tomida, Mary W., Lin, Kevin, Kirk, Jason S., Simper, Melissa S., Mikulec, Carol D., Rundhaug, Joyce E., Fischer, Susan M., Chen, Taiping, Tang, Dean G., Lu, Yue, Shen, Jianjun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6625085/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31296163
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12864-019-5953-1
_version_ 1783434346574643200
author Chao, Hsueh-Ping
Chen, Yueping
Takata, Yoko
Tomida, Mary W.
Lin, Kevin
Kirk, Jason S.
Simper, Melissa S.
Mikulec, Carol D.
Rundhaug, Joyce E.
Fischer, Susan M.
Chen, Taiping
Tang, Dean G.
Lu, Yue
Shen, Jianjun
author_facet Chao, Hsueh-Ping
Chen, Yueping
Takata, Yoko
Tomida, Mary W.
Lin, Kevin
Kirk, Jason S.
Simper, Melissa S.
Mikulec, Carol D.
Rundhaug, Joyce E.
Fischer, Susan M.
Chen, Taiping
Tang, Dean G.
Lu, Yue
Shen, Jianjun
author_sort Chao, Hsueh-Ping
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: RNA-Seq is currently the most widely used tool to analyze whole-transcriptome profiles. There are numerous commercial kits available to facilitate preparing RNA-Seq libraries; however, it is still not clear how some of these kits perform in terms of: 1) ribosomal RNA removal; 2) read coverage or recovery of exonic vs. intronic sequences; 3) identification of differentially expressed genes (DEGs); and 4) detection of long non-coding RNA (lncRNA). In RNA-Seq analysis, understanding the strengths and limitations of commonly used RNA-Seq library preparation protocols is important, as this technology remains costly and time-consuming. RESULTS: In this study, we present a comprehensive evaluation of four RNA-Seq kits. We used three standard input protocols: Illumina TruSeq Stranded Total RNA and mRNA kits, a modified NuGEN Ovation v2 kit, and the TaKaRa SMARTer Ultra Low RNA Kit v3. Our evaluation of these kits included quality control measures such as overall reproducibility, 5′ and 3′ end-bias, and the identification of DEGs, lncRNAs, and alternatively spliced transcripts. Overall, we found that the two Illumina kits were most similar in terms of recovering DEGs, and the Illumina, modified NuGEN, and TaKaRa kits allowed identification of a similar set of DEGs. However, we also discovered that the Illumina, NuGEN and TaKaRa kits each enriched for different sets of genes. CONCLUSIONS: At the manufacturers’ recommended input RNA levels, all the RNA-Seq library preparation protocols evaluated were suitable for distinguishing between experimental groups, and the TruSeq Stranded mRNA kit was universally applicable to studies focusing on protein-coding gene profiles. The TruSeq protocols tended to capture genes with higher expression and GC content, whereas the modified NuGEN protocol tended to capture longer genes. The SMARTer Ultra Low RNA Kit may be a good choice at the low RNA input level, although it was inferior to the TruSeq mRNA kit at standard input level in terms of rRNA removal, exonic mapping rates and recovered DEGs. Therefore, the choice of RNA-Seq library preparation kit can profoundly affect data outcomes. Consequently, it is a pivotal parameter to consider when designing an RNA-Seq experiment. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12864-019-5953-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6625085
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66250852019-07-23 Systematic evaluation of RNA-Seq preparation protocol performance Chao, Hsueh-Ping Chen, Yueping Takata, Yoko Tomida, Mary W. Lin, Kevin Kirk, Jason S. Simper, Melissa S. Mikulec, Carol D. Rundhaug, Joyce E. Fischer, Susan M. Chen, Taiping Tang, Dean G. Lu, Yue Shen, Jianjun BMC Genomics Methodology Article BACKGROUND: RNA-Seq is currently the most widely used tool to analyze whole-transcriptome profiles. There are numerous commercial kits available to facilitate preparing RNA-Seq libraries; however, it is still not clear how some of these kits perform in terms of: 1) ribosomal RNA removal; 2) read coverage or recovery of exonic vs. intronic sequences; 3) identification of differentially expressed genes (DEGs); and 4) detection of long non-coding RNA (lncRNA). In RNA-Seq analysis, understanding the strengths and limitations of commonly used RNA-Seq library preparation protocols is important, as this technology remains costly and time-consuming. RESULTS: In this study, we present a comprehensive evaluation of four RNA-Seq kits. We used three standard input protocols: Illumina TruSeq Stranded Total RNA and mRNA kits, a modified NuGEN Ovation v2 kit, and the TaKaRa SMARTer Ultra Low RNA Kit v3. Our evaluation of these kits included quality control measures such as overall reproducibility, 5′ and 3′ end-bias, and the identification of DEGs, lncRNAs, and alternatively spliced transcripts. Overall, we found that the two Illumina kits were most similar in terms of recovering DEGs, and the Illumina, modified NuGEN, and TaKaRa kits allowed identification of a similar set of DEGs. However, we also discovered that the Illumina, NuGEN and TaKaRa kits each enriched for different sets of genes. CONCLUSIONS: At the manufacturers’ recommended input RNA levels, all the RNA-Seq library preparation protocols evaluated were suitable for distinguishing between experimental groups, and the TruSeq Stranded mRNA kit was universally applicable to studies focusing on protein-coding gene profiles. The TruSeq protocols tended to capture genes with higher expression and GC content, whereas the modified NuGEN protocol tended to capture longer genes. The SMARTer Ultra Low RNA Kit may be a good choice at the low RNA input level, although it was inferior to the TruSeq mRNA kit at standard input level in terms of rRNA removal, exonic mapping rates and recovered DEGs. Therefore, the choice of RNA-Seq library preparation kit can profoundly affect data outcomes. Consequently, it is a pivotal parameter to consider when designing an RNA-Seq experiment. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12864-019-5953-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2019-07-11 /pmc/articles/PMC6625085/ /pubmed/31296163 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12864-019-5953-1 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 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
Chao, Hsueh-Ping
Chen, Yueping
Takata, Yoko
Tomida, Mary W.
Lin, Kevin
Kirk, Jason S.
Simper, Melissa S.
Mikulec, Carol D.
Rundhaug, Joyce E.
Fischer, Susan M.
Chen, Taiping
Tang, Dean G.
Lu, Yue
Shen, Jianjun
Systematic evaluation of RNA-Seq preparation protocol performance
title Systematic evaluation of RNA-Seq preparation protocol performance
title_full Systematic evaluation of RNA-Seq preparation protocol performance
title_fullStr Systematic evaluation of RNA-Seq preparation protocol performance
title_full_unstemmed Systematic evaluation of RNA-Seq preparation protocol performance
title_short Systematic evaluation of RNA-Seq preparation protocol performance
title_sort systematic evaluation of rna-seq preparation protocol performance
topic Methodology Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6625085/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31296163
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12864-019-5953-1
work_keys_str_mv AT chaohsuehping systematicevaluationofrnaseqpreparationprotocolperformance
AT chenyueping systematicevaluationofrnaseqpreparationprotocolperformance
AT takatayoko systematicevaluationofrnaseqpreparationprotocolperformance
AT tomidamaryw systematicevaluationofrnaseqpreparationprotocolperformance
AT linkevin systematicevaluationofrnaseqpreparationprotocolperformance
AT kirkjasons systematicevaluationofrnaseqpreparationprotocolperformance
AT simpermelissas systematicevaluationofrnaseqpreparationprotocolperformance
AT mikuleccarold systematicevaluationofrnaseqpreparationprotocolperformance
AT rundhaugjoycee systematicevaluationofrnaseqpreparationprotocolperformance
AT fischersusanm systematicevaluationofrnaseqpreparationprotocolperformance
AT chentaiping systematicevaluationofrnaseqpreparationprotocolperformance
AT tangdeang systematicevaluationofrnaseqpreparationprotocolperformance
AT luyue systematicevaluationofrnaseqpreparationprotocolperformance
AT shenjianjun systematicevaluationofrnaseqpreparationprotocolperformance