A Comparison of mRNA Sequencing with Random Primed and 3'-Directed Libraries
Johan G.C. van Hasselt,
Leslie M Thompson,
Eric A Sobie,
Evren U. Azeloglu,
Marc R. Birtwistle
Posted 06 Jan 2017
bioRxiv DOI: 10.1101/098905 (published DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-14892-x)
Posted 06 Jan 2017
Deep mRNA sequencing (mRNAseq) is the state-of-the-art for whole transcriptome measurements. A key step is creating a library of cDNA sequencing fragments from RNA. This is generally done by random priming, creating multiple sequencing fragments along the length of each transcript. A 3' end-focused library approach cannot detect differential splicing, but has potentially higher throughput at lower cost (~10-fold lower), along with the ability to improve quantification by using transcript molecule counting with unique molecular identifiers (UMI) to correct for PCR bias. Here, we compare implementation of such a 3'-digital gene expression (3'-DGE) approach with "conventional" random primed mRNAseq, which has not yet been done. We find that while conventional mRNAseq detects ~15% more genes, the resulting lists of differentially expressed genes and therefore biological conclusions and gene signatures are highly concordant between the two techniques. We also find good quantitative agreement on the level of individual genes between the two techniques in terms of both read counts and fold change between two conditions. We conclude that for high-throughput applications, the potential cost savings associated with the 3'-DGE approach are a very reasonable tradeoff for modest reduction in sensitivity and inability to observe alternative splicing, and should enable much larger scale studies focused on not only differential expression analysis, but also quantitative transcriptome profiling. The computational scripts and programs, along with experimental standard operating procedures used in our pipeline presented here, are freely available on our website (www.dtoxs.org).
- Downloaded 465 times
- Download rankings, all-time:
- Site-wide: 36,547 out of 94,912
- In genomics: 3,497 out of 5,955
- Year to date:
- Site-wide: 85,981 out of 94,912
- Since beginning of last month:
- Site-wide: 88,123 out of 94,912
Downloads over time
Distribution of downloads per paper, site-wide
- 18 Dec 2019: We're pleased to announce PanLingua, a new tool that enables you to search for machine-translated bioRxiv preprints using more than 100 different languages.
- 21 May 2019: PLOS Biology has published a community page about Rxivist.org and its design.
- 10 May 2019: The paper analyzing the Rxivist dataset has been published at eLife.
- 1 Mar 2019: We now have summary statistics about bioRxiv downloads and submissions.
- 8 Feb 2019: Data from Altmetric is now available on the Rxivist details page for every preprint. Look for the "donut" under the download metrics.
- 30 Jan 2019: preLights has featured the Rxivist preprint and written about our findings.
- 22 Jan 2019: Nature just published an article about Rxivist and our data.
- 13 Jan 2019: The Rxivist preprint is live!