Title |
High-specificity detection of rare alleles with Paired-End Low Error Sequencing (PELE-Seq)
|
---|---|
Published in |
BMC Genomics, June 2016
|
DOI | 10.1186/s12864-016-2669-3 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Jessica L. Preston, Ariel E. Royall, Melissa A. Randel, Kristin L. Sikkink, Patrick C. Phillips, Eric A. Johnson |
Abstract |
Polymorphic loci exist throughout the genomes of a population and provide the raw genetic material needed for a species to adapt to changes in the environment. The minor allele frequencies of rare Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs) within a population have been difficult to track with Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS), due to the high error rate of standard methods such as Illumina sequencing. We have developed a wet-lab protocol and variant-calling method that identifies both sequencing and PCR errors, called Paired-End Low Error Sequencing (PELE-Seq). To test the specificity and sensitivity of the PELE-Seq method, we sequenced control E. coli DNA libraries containing known rare alleles present at frequencies ranging from 0.2-0.4 % of the total reads. PELE-Seq had higher specificity and sensitivity than standard libraries. We then used PELE-Seq to characterize rare alleles in a Caenorhabditis remanei nematode worm population before and after laboratory adaptation, and found that minor and rare alleles can undergo large changes in frequency during lab-adaptation. We have developed a method of rare allele detection that mitigates both sequencing and PCR errors, called PELE-Seq. PELE-Seq was evaluated using control E. coli populations and was then used to compare a wild C. remanei population to a lab-adapted population. The PELE-Seq method is ideal for investigating the dynamics of rare alleles in a broad range of reduced-representation sequencing methods, including targeted amplicon sequencing, RAD-Seq, ddRAD, and GBS. PELE-Seq is also well-suited for whole genome sequencing of mitochondria and viruses, and for high-throughput rare mutation screens. |
Twitter Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 3 | 30% |
United Kingdom | 2 | 20% |
Unknown | 5 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 6 | 60% |
Scientists | 3 | 30% |
Unknown | 1 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 2 | 4% |
Unknown | 50 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 15 | 29% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 17% |
Student > Bachelor | 6 | 12% |
Student > Master | 5 | 10% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 6% |
Other | 8 | 15% |
Unknown | 6 | 12% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 18 | 35% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 17 | 33% |
Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 4% |
Mathematics | 1 | 2% |
Computer Science | 1 | 2% |
Other | 6 | 12% |
Unknown | 7 | 13% |