Systematic comparative analysis of strand-specific, cost-effective, RNA-seq library preparation methods for low input samples
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
PROVIDER: PRJNA704106 | ENA |
REPOSITORIES: ENA
Dataset's files
| Action | DRS | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SRR13786231_1.fastq.gz | Fastqsanger.gz | |||
| SRR13786231_2.fastq.gz | Fastqsanger.gz | |||
| SRR13786232_1.fastq.gz | Fastqsanger.gz | |||
| SRR13786232_2.fastq.gz | Fastqsanger.gz | |||
| SRR13786233_1.fastq.gz | Fastqsanger.gz |
Items per page: 5 1 - 5 of 100 |
Similar Datasets
Project description:Despite the precipitous decline in the cost of genome sequencing over the last few years, library preparation for RNA-seq is still laborious and expensive for high throughput screening for drug discovery. Limited availability of RNA generated by some experimental workflows poses an additional challenge and typically adds to the cost of RNA library preparation. In a search for low cost, automation-compatible RNA library preparation kits that also maintain strand specificity and are amenable to low input RNA quantities, we systematically tested two recent commercial technologies – Swift and Swift Rapid – using the Illumina TruSeq stranded mRNA, the de facto standard workflow for bulk transcriptomics, as our reference. We used the Universal Human Reference RNA (UHRR) (composed of equal quantities of total RNA from 10 human cancer cell lines) to benchmark differential gene expression in these kits, at input quantities ranging between 10 ng to 500 ng. Read quality and alignment metrics revealed high mapping efficiency and uniform read coverage through genes for all samples across all three kits. Normalized read counts between all treatment groups were in high agreement, with pairwise Pearson correlation coefficients >0.97. Compared to the Illumina TruSeq stranded mRNA kit, both Swift RNA library kits are cost effective and offer shorter workflow times enabled by their patented Adaptase technology. Furthermore, the Swift RNA kit allows for a relatively broader (and lower) input range, producing consistent results across diverse samples. The Swift Rapid RNA method is the fastest and most cost effective NGS workflow that is best suited for higher RNA yields, with the exact same RNA input range as the Illumina TruSeq kit. We also found the Swift RNA kit to produce the fewest number of differentially expressed genes and pathways attributable to input mRNA concentration.
2021-02-23 | GSE167300 | GEO
Project description:Library preparation is a key step in gene expression quantification. There are considerable advantages to both strand specific sequencing and the ability to sequence samples with very small amounts of starting material. Until recently there was no kit available that allowed both simultaneously. The standard Illumina-TruSeq stranded mRNA Sample Preparation kit requires abundant starting quantity while the Takara Bio-SMART-Seq® v4 Ultra® Low Input RNA kit allows for ultra low starting quantities but sacrifices strand specificity. Recently a kit that can do both, SMARTer® Stranded Total RNA-Seq Kit v2 - Pico Input Mammalian by Takara Bio, has become available. Evaluating the performance and effects of these sample preparation kits is a critical determinant for selecting the appropriate sequencing protocol, but a comprehensive comparison is currently missing. To address this we performed a detailed comparative analysis of sequencing libraries prepared with the three kits. We prepared a set of samples representing two experimental conditions with each kit, allowing for comparison of the kits in a standard realistic differential expression analysis. We find substantial differences in the levels of alignment and differential gene expression. Using differential expression analysis we show that using Pico results in identifying 55% less differentially expressed genes than TruSeq. Nevertheless, using gene pathway enrichment analysis we find similar results for all three kits, indicating that ultimately comparable functional results can be reached.
2019-09-17 | GSE124167 | GEO
Project description:Comparative evaluation of RNA-Seq library preparation methods for strand-specificity and low input
| PRJNA510931 | ENA
Project description:Advances in Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) have made available a wealth of information that had previously been inaccessible to researchers and clinicians. NGS has been applied to understand genomic, transcriptomic, and epigenomic changes and gained traction as a significant tool capable of accelerating diagnosis, prognosis, and biomarker discovery. However, these NGS assays have yet to be practical methods for patient stratification or diagnosis because of the gap between the tiny quantities of biomaterials provided by a clinical sample and the large DNA input required by most of these assays. Current library preparation methodologies typically require large input amounts of DNA and a long and complicated manual process. Here we present a microfluidic reactor system for NGS library preparation, capable of reducing the number of pipetting steps significantly, automating much of the process, while supporting extremely low DNA input requirement (10 pg per library). This largely automated technology will allow for low-input preparations of 8 libraries simultaneously while reducing batch to batch variation and operator hands-on time.
2020-01-02 | GSE132786 | GEO
Project description:Comparison of library preparation methods using Cryptococcus neoformans var. grubii
| PRJEB7411 | ENA
Project description:Library preparation is a key step in sequencing. For RNA sequencing there are advantages to both strand specificity and working with minute starting material, yet until recently there was no kit available enabling both. The Illumina TruSeq stranded mRNA Sample Preparation kit (TruSeq) requires abundant starting material while the Takara Bio SMART-Seq v4 Ultra Low Input RNA kit (V4) sacrifices strand specificity. The SMARTer Stranded Total RNA-Seq Kit v2 - Pico Input Mammalian (Pico) by Takara Bio claims to overcome these limitations. Comparative evaluation of these kits is important for selecting the appropriate protocol. We compared the three kits in a realistic differential expression analysis. We prepared and sequenced samples from two experimental conditions of biological interest with each of the three kits. We report differences between the kits at the level of differential gene expression; for example, the Pico kit results in 55% fewer differentially expressed genes than TruSeq. Nevertheless, the agreement of the observed enriched pathways suggests that comparable functional results can be obtained. In summary we conclude that the Pico kit sufficiently reproduces the results of the other kits at the level of pathway analysis while providing a combination of options that is not available in the other kits.
| S-EPMC6748930 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Systematic assessment of commercially available low-input miRNA library preparation kits
| PRJNA552326 | ENA
Project description:Library preparation for whole genome bisulphite sequencing (WGBS) is challenging due to side effects of the bisulphite treatment, which leads to extensive DNA damage. Recently, a new generation of methods for bisulphite sequencing library preparation have been devised. They are based on initial bisulphite treatment of the DNA, followed by adaptor tagging of single stranded DNA fragments, and enable WGBS using low quantities of input DNA. In this study, we present a novel approach for quick and cost effective WGBS library preparation that is based on splinted adaptor tagging (SPLAT) of bisulphite-converted single-stranded DNA. Moreover, we validate SPLAT against three commercially available WGBS library preparation techniques, two of which are based on bisulphite treatment prior to adaptor tagging and one is a conventional WGBS method.
2016-10-27 | GSE89213 | GEO
Project description:Despite the recent precipitous decline in the cost of genome sequencing, library preparation for RNA-seq is still laborious and expensive for applications such as high throughput screening. Limited availability of RNA generated by some experimental workflows poses an additional challenge and increases the cost of RNA library preparation. In a search for low cost, automation-compatible RNA library preparation kits that maintain strand specificity and are amenable to low input RNA quantities, we systematically tested two recent commercial technologies-Swift RNA and Swift Rapid RNA, presently offered by Integrated DNA Technologies (IDT) -alongside the Illumina TruSeq stranded mRNA, the de facto standard workflow for bulk transcriptomics. We used the Universal Human Reference RNA (UHRR) (composed of equal quantities of total RNA from 10 human cancer cell lines) to benchmark gene expression in these kits, at input quantities ranging between 10 to 500 ng. We found normalized read counts between all treatment groups to be in high agreement. Compared to the Illumina TruSeq stranded mRNA kit, both Swift RNA library kits offer shorter workflow times enabled by their patented Adaptase technology. We also found the Swift RNA kit to produce the fewest number of differentially expressed genes and pathways directly attributable to input mRNA amount.
| S-EPMC8810888 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In recent years, tagmentation-based library preparation using a hyperactive version of the Tn5 transposase gained more and more popularity. The limited hands-on time, robustness and high efficiency of the method are essential for the processing of next-generation sequencing libraries form little input material like single cells or the processing of hundreds of samples simultaneously. The hyperactive Tn5 is commercially available (Nextera XT DNA library preparation kit), however, high-throughput experiments with hundreds of samples are costly. Here, we present a highly reproducible Tn5 transposase purification strategy via an N-terminal His6-Sumo3 tag and the workflow for the tagmentation-based NGS library preparation. We demonstrate that NGS libraries processed with the in-house produced Tn5 are of the same quality like those processed with the Nextera XT DNA library preparation kit and that the purification of the transposase is reproducible across institutes. Producing the Tn5 transposase in-house allows for customized experimental design and reduces costs of large-scale experiments dramatically. We describe a novel single cell polyadenylation site mapping protocol that benefits from the fact that the in-house produced Tn5 can be loaded with any desired linker oligonucleotide for tagmentation.
2017-11-13 | GSE101519 | GEO