↓ Skip to main content

Subset selection of high-depth next generation sequencing reads for de novo genome assembly using MapReduce framework

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 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
Subset selection of high-depth next generation sequencing reads for de novo genome assembly using MapReduce framework
Published in
BMC Genomics, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/1471-2164-16-s12-s9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chih-Hao Fang, Yu-Jung Chang, Wei-Chun Chung, Ping-Heng Hsieh, Chung-Yen Lin, Jan-Ming Ho

Abstract

Recent progress in next-generation sequencing technology has afforded several improvements such as ultra-high throughput at low cost, very high read quality, and substantially increased sequencing depth. State-of-the-art high-throughput sequencers, such as the Illumina MiSeq system, can generate ~15 Gbp sequencing data per run, with >80% bases above Q30 and a sequencing depth of up to several 1000x for small genomes. Illumina HiSeq 2500 is capable of generating up to 1 Tbp per run, with >80% bases above Q30 and often >100x sequencing depth for large genomes. To speed up otherwise time-consuming genome assembly and/or to obtain a skeleton of the assembly quickly for scaffolding or progressive assembly, methods for noise removal and reduction of redundancy in the original data, with almost equal or better assembly results, are worth studying. We developed two subset selection methods for single-end reads and a method for paired-end reads based on base quality scores and other read analytic tools using the MapReduce framework. We proposed two strategies to select reads: MinimalQ and ProductQ. MinimalQ selects reads with minimal base-quality above a threshold. ProductQ selects reads with probability of no incorrect base above a threshold. In the single-end experiments, we used Escherichia coli and Bacillus cereus datasets of MiSeq, Velvet assembler for genome assembly, and GAGE benchmark tools for result evaluation. In the paired-end experiments, we used the giant grouper (Epinephelus lanceolatus) dataset of HiSeq, ALLPATHS-LG genome assembler, and QUAST quality assessment tool for comparing genome assemblies of the original set and the subset. The results show that subset selection not only can speed up the genome assembly but also can produce substantially longer scaffolds. The software is freely available at https://github.com/moneycat/QReadSelector.

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 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 2 17%
Student > Master 2 17%
Professor 2 17%
Other 1 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 8%
Other 2 17%
Unknown 2 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 4 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 33%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 8%
Unknown 2 17%
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 19 December 2015.
All research outputs
#15,329,366
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#6,277
of 10,800 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,491
of 392,477 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#234
of 342 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,800 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 392,477 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 342 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.