Dataset Information

Searchlight: automated bulk RNA-seq exploration and visualisation using dynamically generated R scripts.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Once bulk RNA-seq data has been processed, i.e. aligned and then expression and differential tables generated, there remains the essential process where the biology is explored, visualized and interpreted. Without the use of a visualisation and interpretation pipeline this step can be time consuming and laborious, and is often completed using R. Though commercial visualisation and interpretation pipelines are comprehensive, freely available pipelines are currently more limited.

Results

Here we demonstrate Searchlight, a freely available bulk RNA-seq visualisation and interpretation pipeline. Searchlight provides: a comprehensive statistical and visual analysis, focusing on the global, pathway and single gene levels; compatibility with most differential experimental designs irrespective of organism or experimental complexity, via three workflows; reports; and support for downstream user modification of plots via user-friendly R-scripts and a Shiny app. We show that Searchlight offers greater automation than current best tools (VIPER and BioJupies). We demonstrate in a timed re-analysis study, that alongside a standard bulk RNA-seq processing pipeline, Searchlight can be used to complete bulk RNA-seq projects up to the point of manuscript quality figures, in under 3 h.

Conclusions

Compared to a manual R based analysis or current best freely available pipelines (VIPER and BioJupies), Searchlight can reduce the time and effort needed to complete bulk RNA-seq projects to manuscript level. Searchlight is suitable for bioinformaticians, service providers and bench scientists. https://github.com/Searchlight2/Searchlight2 .

SUBMITTER: Cole JJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8375142 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Finding the right balance of quality and quantity can be important, and it is essential that project quality does not drop below the level where important main conclusions are missed or misstated. We use knock-out and over-expression studies as a simplification to test recovery of a known causal gene in RNA-Seq cell line experiments. When single-end RNA-Seq reads are aligned with STAR and quantified with htseq-count, we found potential value in testing the use of the Generalized Linear Model (GLM) implementation of edgeR with robust dispersion estimation more frequently for either single-variate or multi-variate 2-group comparisons (with the possibility of defining criteria less stringent than |fold-change| > 1.5 and FDR < 0.05). When considering a limited number of patient sample comparisons with larger sample size, there might be some decreased variability between methods (except for DESeq1). However, at the same time, the ranking of the gene identified using immunohistochemistry (for ER/PR/HER2 in breast cancer samples from The Cancer Genome Atlas) showed as possible shift in performance compared to the cell line comparisons, potentially highlighting utility for standard statistical tests and/or limma-based analysis with larger sample sizes. If this continues to be true in additional studies and comparisons, then that could be consistent with the possibility that it may be important to allocate time for potential methods troubleshooting for genomics projects. Analysis of public data presented in this study does not consider all experimental designs, and presentation of downstream analysis is limited. So, any estimate from this simplification would be an underestimation of the true need for some methods testing for every project. Additionally, this set of independent cell line experiments has a limitation in being able to determine the frequency of missing a highly important gene if the problem is rare (such as 10% or lower). For example, if there was an assumption that only one method can be tested for "initial" analysis, then it is not completely clear to the extent that using edgeR-robust might perform better than DESeq2 in the cell line experiments. Importantly, we do not wish to cause undue concern, and we believe that it should often be possible to define a gene expression differential expression workflow that is suitable for some purposes for many samples. Nevertheless, at the same time, we provide a variety of measures that we believe emphasize the need to critically assess every individual project and maximize confidence in published results.