↓ Skip to main content

Removing duplicate reads using graphics processing units

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Removing duplicate reads using graphics processing units
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12859-016-1192-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrea Manconi, Marco Moscatelli, Giuliano Armano, Matteo Gnocchi, Alessandro Orro, Luciano Milanesi

Abstract

During library construction polymerase chain reaction is used to enrich the DNA before sequencing. Typically, this process generates duplicate read sequences. Removal of these artifacts is mandatory, as they can affect the correct interpretation of data in several analyses. Ideally, duplicate reads should be characterized by identical nucleotide sequences. However, due to sequencing errors, duplicates may also be nearly-identical. Removing nearly-identical duplicates can result in a notable computational effort. To deal with this challenge, we recently proposed a GPU method aimed at removing identical and nearly-identical duplicates generated with an Illumina platform. The method implements an approach based on prefix-suffix comparison. Read sequences with identical prefix are considered potential duplicates. Then, their suffixes are compared to identify and remove those that are actually duplicated. Although the method can be efficiently used to remove duplicates, there are some limitations that need to be overcome. In particular, it cannot to detect potential duplicates in the event that prefixes are longer than 27 bases, and it does not provide support for paired-end read libraries. Moreover, large clusters of potential duplicates are split into smaller with the aim to guarantees a reasonable computing time. This heuristic may affect the accuracy of the analysis. In this work we propose GPU-DupRemoval, a new implementation of our method able to (i) cluster reads without constraints on the maximum length of the prefixes, (ii) support both single- and paired-end read libraries, and (iii) analyze large clusters of potential duplicates. Due to the massive parallelization obtained by exploiting graphics cards, GPU-DupRemoval removes duplicate reads faster than other cutting-edge solutions, while outperforming most of them in terms of amount of duplicates reads.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 4%
Unknown 23 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 21%
Student > Master 4 17%
Researcher 3 13%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Professor 1 4%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 6 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 21%
Computer Science 3 13%
Environmental Science 1 4%
Chemistry 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 November 2016.
All research outputs
#18,482,034
of 22,901,818 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#6,335
of 7,302 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#236,902
of 312,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#88
of 125 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,901,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,302 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,900 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 125 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.