Title |
Comparison of library preparation methods reveals their impact on interpretation of metatranscriptomic data
|
---|---|
Published in |
BMC Genomics, October 2014
|
DOI | 10.1186/1471-2164-15-912 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Adriana Alberti, Caroline Belser, Stéfan Engelen, Laurie Bertrand, Céline Orvain, Laura Brinas, Corinne Cruaud, Laurène Giraut, Corinne Da Silva, Cyril Firmo, Jean-Marc Aury, Patrick Wincker |
Abstract |
Metatranscriptomics is rapidly expanding our knowledge of gene expression patterns and pathway dynamics in natural microbial communities. However, to cope with the challenges of environmental sampling, various rRNA removal and cDNA synthesis methods have been applied in published microbial metatranscriptomic studies, making comparisons arduous. Whereas efficiency and biases introduced by rRNA removal methods have been relatively well explored, the impact of cDNA synthesis and library preparation on transcript abundance remains poorly characterized. The evaluation of potential biases introduced at this step is challenging for metatranscriptomic samples, where data analyses are complex, for example because of the lack of reference genomes. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
China | 1 | 10% |
United Kingdom | 1 | 10% |
Belgium | 1 | 10% |
Germany | 1 | 10% |
France | 1 | 10% |
United States | 1 | 10% |
Unknown | 4 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Scientists | 6 | 60% |
Members of the public | 3 | 30% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 3 | 1% |
France | 3 | 1% |
United States | 2 | <1% |
Germany | 1 | <1% |
Austria | 1 | <1% |
Sweden | 1 | <1% |
Italy | 1 | <1% |
South Africa | 1 | <1% |
Czechia | 1 | <1% |
Other | 6 | 3% |
Unknown | 212 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 60 | 26% |
Researcher | 55 | 24% |
Student > Master | 20 | 9% |
Student > Postgraduate | 14 | 6% |
Other | 12 | 5% |
Other | 39 | 17% |
Unknown | 32 | 14% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 85 | 37% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 43 | 19% |
Immunology and Microbiology | 14 | 6% |
Environmental Science | 14 | 6% |
Computer Science | 6 | 3% |
Other | 32 | 14% |
Unknown | 38 | 16% |