{"title":"Beyond the base pairs: comparative genome-wide DNA methylation profiling across sequencing technologies.","authors":"Xin Liu,Yu Pang,Junqi Shan,Yunfei Wang,Yanhua Zheng,Yuhang Xue,Xuerong Zhou,Wenjun Wang,Yanlai Sun,Xiaojing Yan,Jiantao Shi,Xiaoxue Wang,Hongcang Gu,Fan Zhang","doi":"10.1093/bib/bbae440","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) methylation plays a key role in gene regulation and is critical for development and human disease. Techniques such as whole-genome bisulfite sequencing (WGBS) and reduced representation bisulfite sequencing (RRBS) allow DNA methylation analysis at the genome scale, with Illumina NovaSeq 6000 and MGI Tech DNBSEQ-T7 being popular due to their efficiency and affordability. However, detailed comparative studies of their performance are not available. In this study, we constructed 60 WGBS and RRBS libraries for two platforms using different types of clinical samples and generated approximately 2.8 terabases of sequencing data. We systematically compared quality control metrics, genomic coverage, CpG methylation levels, intra- and interplatform correlations, and performance in detecting differentially methylated positions. Our results revealed that the DNBSEQ platform exhibited better raw read quality, although base quality recalibration indicated potential overestimation of base quality. The DNBSEQ platform also showed lower sequencing depth and less coverage uniformity in GC-rich regions than did the NovaSeq platform and tended to enrich methylated regions. Overall, both platforms demonstrated robust intra- and interplatform reproducibility for RRBS and WGBS, with NovaSeq performing better for WGBS, highlighting the importance of considering these factors when selecting a platform for bisulfite sequencing.","PeriodicalId":9209,"journal":{"name":"Briefings in bioinformatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Briefings in bioinformatics","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bib/bbae440","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) methylation plays a key role in gene regulation and is critical for development and human disease. Techniques such as whole-genome bisulfite sequencing (WGBS) and reduced representation bisulfite sequencing (RRBS) allow DNA methylation analysis at the genome scale, with Illumina NovaSeq 6000 and MGI Tech DNBSEQ-T7 being popular due to their efficiency and affordability. However, detailed comparative studies of their performance are not available. In this study, we constructed 60 WGBS and RRBS libraries for two platforms using different types of clinical samples and generated approximately 2.8 terabases of sequencing data. We systematically compared quality control metrics, genomic coverage, CpG methylation levels, intra- and interplatform correlations, and performance in detecting differentially methylated positions. Our results revealed that the DNBSEQ platform exhibited better raw read quality, although base quality recalibration indicated potential overestimation of base quality. The DNBSEQ platform also showed lower sequencing depth and less coverage uniformity in GC-rich regions than did the NovaSeq platform and tended to enrich methylated regions. Overall, both platforms demonstrated robust intra- and interplatform reproducibility for RRBS and WGBS, with NovaSeq performing better for WGBS, highlighting the importance of considering these factors when selecting a platform for bisulfite sequencing.
期刊介绍:
Briefings in Bioinformatics is an international journal serving as a platform for researchers and educators in the life sciences. It also appeals to mathematicians, statisticians, and computer scientists applying their expertise to biological challenges. The journal focuses on reviews tailored for users of databases and analytical tools in contemporary genetics, molecular and systems biology. It stands out by offering practical assistance and guidance to non-specialists in computerized methodologies. Covering a wide range from introductory concepts to specific protocols and analyses, the papers address bacterial, plant, fungal, animal, and human data.
The journal's detailed subject areas include genetic studies of phenotypes and genotypes, mapping, DNA sequencing, expression profiling, gene expression studies, microarrays, alignment methods, protein profiles and HMMs, lipids, metabolic and signaling pathways, structure determination and function prediction, phylogenetic studies, and education and training.