Comparative analysis of RNA-seq data from polyA RNAs selection and ribosomal RNAs deletion protocol by strand-specific RNA sequencing technology

Lingjie Fu, Meili Chen, Jiayan Wu, Jingfa Xiao, Zhewen Zhang
{"title":"Comparative analysis of RNA-seq data from polyA RNAs selection and ribosomal RNAs deletion protocol by strand-specific RNA sequencing technology","authors":"Lingjie Fu, Meili Chen, Jiayan Wu, Jingfa Xiao, Zhewen Zhang","doi":"10.1109/ISB.2014.6990734","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The conventional non-strand-specific RNA-seq method is widely used for many studies, but it cannot characterize which strand was the transcript originally came from. Strand-specific RNA library construction methods have been developed to overcome this drawback. Here, we compared transcriptomics data from two mainstream RNA enrichment methods (polyA RNAs selection and ribosomal RNAs deletion) by strand-specific RNA sequencing. Using paired-end strategy, we obtained 175 and 149 million high quality reads without ribosomal RNA reads by ribosomal RNAs deletion and poly(A)+ RNAs selection protocol, respectively. From these reads, rmRNA-seq had lower (53.28%) unique mapping rate than the mRNA-seq (73.89%). But, the ribosomal RNAs deletion protocol detected more known non-coding RNAs, particularly lncRNAs, pseudogenes and snoRNAs. Larger proportion (66.7%) of reads mapping to intronic and intergenic regions in ribosomal RNAs deletion method and fewer percentages (33.3%) of reads aligning to exonic regions compared with poly(A)+ RNAs selection method (35.8% and 64.2%). The ribosomal RNAs deletion protocol provides advantages over the poly(A)+ RNAs selection method in sense-antisense pairs detection. In conclusion, the comparison of these two rRNA enrichment methods provides us insight for utility of each protocol. Moreover, we believe that ribosomal RNAs deletion based strand-specific RNA sequencing show us a more comprehensive view of eukaryotic transcriptomes.","PeriodicalId":249103,"journal":{"name":"2014 8th International Conference on Systems Biology (ISB)","volume":"91 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2014 8th International Conference on Systems Biology (ISB)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ISB.2014.6990734","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The conventional non-strand-specific RNA-seq method is widely used for many studies, but it cannot characterize which strand was the transcript originally came from. Strand-specific RNA library construction methods have been developed to overcome this drawback. Here, we compared transcriptomics data from two mainstream RNA enrichment methods (polyA RNAs selection and ribosomal RNAs deletion) by strand-specific RNA sequencing. Using paired-end strategy, we obtained 175 and 149 million high quality reads without ribosomal RNA reads by ribosomal RNAs deletion and poly(A)+ RNAs selection protocol, respectively. From these reads, rmRNA-seq had lower (53.28%) unique mapping rate than the mRNA-seq (73.89%). But, the ribosomal RNAs deletion protocol detected more known non-coding RNAs, particularly lncRNAs, pseudogenes and snoRNAs. Larger proportion (66.7%) of reads mapping to intronic and intergenic regions in ribosomal RNAs deletion method and fewer percentages (33.3%) of reads aligning to exonic regions compared with poly(A)+ RNAs selection method (35.8% and 64.2%). The ribosomal RNAs deletion protocol provides advantages over the poly(A)+ RNAs selection method in sense-antisense pairs detection. In conclusion, the comparison of these two rRNA enrichment methods provides us insight for utility of each protocol. Moreover, we believe that ribosomal RNAs deletion based strand-specific RNA sequencing show us a more comprehensive view of eukaryotic transcriptomes.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
采用链特异性RNA测序技术对多a RNA选择和核糖体RNA删除方案的RNA-seq数据进行比较分析
传统的非链特异性RNA-seq方法被广泛用于许多研究,但它不能表征转录本最初来自哪条链。链特异性RNA文库构建方法已被开发来克服这一缺点。在这里,我们通过链特异性RNA测序比较了两种主流RNA富集方法(多a RNA选择和核糖体RNA删除)的转录组学数据。使用配对端策略,我们分别通过核糖体RNA缺失和poly(A)+ RNA选择方案获得了1.75亿个和1.49亿个不含核糖体RNA的高质量reads。从这些reads来看,rmRNA-seq的唯一定位率(53.28%)低于mRNA-seq(73.89%)。但是,核糖体rna删除方案检测到更多已知的非编码rna,特别是lncRNAs、假基因和snoRNAs。与poly(A)+ RNAs选择方法相比,核糖体rna删除方法中定位于内含子和基因间区的reads比例(66.7%)更高,外显子区域的reads比例(33.3%)更低(35.8%和64.2%)。在正反义对检测方面,核糖体rna删除方案比poly(A)+ rna选择方法具有优势。总之,这两种rRNA富集方法的比较为我们提供了每种方案的效用。此外,我们相信基于核糖体RNA缺失的链特异性RNA测序向我们展示了真核生物转录组的更全面的观点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Topological characterization of housekeeping genes in human protein-protein interaction network The correlation and regression analysis on aerosol optical depth, ice cover and cloud cover in Greenland Sea A semi-tensor product approach for Probabilistic Boolean Networks VaccineWatch: a monitoring system of vaccine messages from social media data Evolution analysis for HA gene of human influenza A H3N2 virus (1990 – 2013)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1