Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
BMC Bioinformatics. 2012 Apr 19;13 Suppl 6:S4. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-13-S6-S4.

Biases in read coverage demonstrated by interlaboratory and interplatform comparison of 117 mRNA and genome sequencing experiments.

Author information

1
Institute for Information Transmission Problems, Russian Academy of Sciences, 19 Bolshoy Karetny per., Moscow, 127994, Russia. khrameeva@genebee.msu.ru

Abstract

High-throughput sequencing of whole genomes and transcriptomes allows one to generate large amounts of sequence data very rapidly and at a low cost. The goal of most mRNA sequencing studies is to perform the comparison of the expression level between different samples. However, given a broad variety of modern sequencing protocols, platforms and versions thereof, it is not clear to what extent the obtained results are consistent across platforms and laboratories. The comparison of 117 human mRNA and genome high-throughput sequencing experiments performed on the Illumina and SOLiD platforms at 26 institutions all over the world demonstrated high dependency of the gene coverage profiles on the producing laboratory. Gene coverage profiles showed laboratory-specific non-uniformity that survived the 3'-bias correction and mappability normalization, suggesting that there are other yet unknown mRNA-associated biases.

PMID:
22537043
PMCID:
PMC3358657
DOI:
10.1186/1471-2105-13-S6-S4
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for BioMed Central Icon for PubMed Central
    Loading ...
    Support Center