↓ Skip to main content

Trimming of sequence reads alters RNA-Seq gene expression estimates

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#45 of 7,475)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
81 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
143 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
671 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
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
Trimming of sequence reads alters RNA-Seq gene expression estimates
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12859-016-0956-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Claire R. Williams, Alyssa Baccarella, Jay Z. Parrish, Charles C. Kim

Abstract

High-throughput RNA-Sequencing (RNA-Seq) has become the preferred technique for studying gene expression differences between biological samples and for discovering novel isoforms, though the techniques to analyze the resulting data are still immature. One pre-processing step that is widely but heterogeneously applied is trimming, in which low quality bases, identified by the probability that they are called incorrectly, are removed. However, the impact of trimming on subsequent alignment to a genome could influence downstream analyses including gene expression estimation; we hypothesized that this might occur in an inconsistent manner across different genes, resulting in differential bias. To assess the effects of trimming on gene expression, we generated RNA-Seq data sets from four samples of larval Drosophila melanogaster sensory neurons, and used three trimming algorithms-SolexaQA, Trimmomatic, and ConDeTri-to perform quality-based trimming across a wide range of stringencies. After aligning the reads to the D. melanogaster genome with TopHat2, we used Cuffdiff2 to compare the original, untrimmed gene expression estimates to those following trimming. With the most aggressive trimming parameters, over ten percent of genes had significant changes in their estimated expression levels. This trend was seen with two additional RNA-Seq data sets and with alternative differential expression analysis pipelines. We found that the majority of the expression changes could be mitigated by imposing a minimum length filter following trimming, suggesting that the differential gene expression was primarily being driven by spurious mapping of short reads. Slight differences with the untrimmed data set remained after length filtering, which were associated with genes with low exon numbers and high GC content. Finally, an analysis of paired RNA-seq/microarray data sets suggests that no or modest trimming results in the most biologically accurate gene expression estimates. We find that aggressive quality-based trimming has a large impact on the apparent makeup of RNA-Seq-based gene expression estimates, and that short reads can have a particularly strong impact. We conclude that implementation of trimming in RNA-Seq analysis workflows warrants caution, and if used, should be used in conjunction with a minimum read length filter to minimize the introduction of unpredictable changes in expression estimates.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 81 X users 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 671 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 12 2%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Italy 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Mexico 2 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Other 6 <1%
Unknown 638 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 176 26%
Researcher 128 19%
Student > Master 97 14%
Student > Bachelor 47 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 35 5%
Other 77 11%
Unknown 111 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 232 35%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 197 29%
Computer Science 31 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 15 2%
Other 44 7%
Unknown 135 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 51. 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 17 January 2019.
All research outputs
#750,920
of 23,850,698 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#45
of 7,475 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,622
of 301,851 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#3
of 143 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,850,698 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,475 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
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 301,851 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 143 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.