File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: A benchmark study on error-correction by read-pairing and tag-clustering in amplicon-based deep sequencing

TitleA benchmark study on error-correction by read-pairing and tag-clustering in amplicon-based deep sequencing
Authors
KeywordsRead-pairing
Error-correction
Error rate
Deep sequencing
Amplicon sequencing
Tag-clustering
Issue Date2016
Citation
BMC Genomics, 2016, v. 17, n. 1, article no. 108 How to Cite?
Abstract© 2016 Zhang et al. Background: The high error rate of next generation sequencing (NGS) restricts some of its applications, such as monitoring virus mutations and detecting rare mutations in tumors. There are two commonly employed sequencing library preparation strategies to improve sequencing accuracy by correcting sequencing errors: read-pairing method and tag-clustering method (i.e. primer ID or UID). Here, we constructed a homogeneous library from a single clone, and compared the variant calling accuracy of these error-correction methods. Result: We comprehensively described the strengths and pitfalls of these methods. We found that both read-pairing and tag-clustering methods significantly decreased sequencing error rate. While the read-pairing method was more effective than the tag-clustering method at correcting insertion and deletion errors, it was not as effective as the tag-clustering method at correcting substitution errors. In addition, we observed that when the read quality was poor, the tag-clustering method led to huge coverage loss. We also tested the effect of applying quality score filtering to the error-correction methods and demonstrated that quality score filtering was able to impose a minor, yet statistically significant improvement to the error-correction methods tested in this study. Conclusion: Our study provides a benchmark for researchers to select suitable error-correction methods based on the goal of the experiment by balancing the trade-off between sequencing cost (i.e. sequencing coverage requirement) and detection sensitivity.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/285940
PubMed Central ID
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorZhang, Tian Hao-
dc.contributor.authorWu, Nicholas C.-
dc.contributor.authorSun, Ren-
dc.date.accessioned2020-08-18T04:57:02Z-
dc.date.available2020-08-18T04:57:02Z-
dc.date.issued2016-
dc.identifier.citationBMC Genomics, 2016, v. 17, n. 1, article no. 108-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/285940-
dc.description.abstract© 2016 Zhang et al. Background: The high error rate of next generation sequencing (NGS) restricts some of its applications, such as monitoring virus mutations and detecting rare mutations in tumors. There are two commonly employed sequencing library preparation strategies to improve sequencing accuracy by correcting sequencing errors: read-pairing method and tag-clustering method (i.e. primer ID or UID). Here, we constructed a homogeneous library from a single clone, and compared the variant calling accuracy of these error-correction methods. Result: We comprehensively described the strengths and pitfalls of these methods. We found that both read-pairing and tag-clustering methods significantly decreased sequencing error rate. While the read-pairing method was more effective than the tag-clustering method at correcting insertion and deletion errors, it was not as effective as the tag-clustering method at correcting substitution errors. In addition, we observed that when the read quality was poor, the tag-clustering method led to huge coverage loss. We also tested the effect of applying quality score filtering to the error-correction methods and demonstrated that quality score filtering was able to impose a minor, yet statistically significant improvement to the error-correction methods tested in this study. Conclusion: Our study provides a benchmark for researchers to select suitable error-correction methods based on the goal of the experiment by balancing the trade-off between sequencing cost (i.e. sequencing coverage requirement) and detection sensitivity.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofBMC Genomics-
dc.rightsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.-
dc.subjectRead-pairing-
dc.subjectError-correction-
dc.subjectError rate-
dc.subjectDeep sequencing-
dc.subjectAmplicon sequencing-
dc.subjectTag-clustering-
dc.titleA benchmark study on error-correction by read-pairing and tag-clustering in amplicon-based deep sequencing-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.naturepublished_or_final_version-
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12864-016-2388-9-
dc.identifier.pmid26868371-
dc.identifier.pmcidPMC4751728-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-84957868538-
dc.identifier.volume17-
dc.identifier.issue1-
dc.identifier.spagearticle no. 108-
dc.identifier.epagearticle no. 108-
dc.identifier.eissn1471-2164-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000370015400001-
dc.identifier.issnl1471-2164-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats