Dataset Information

Comparison of Poly(A) capture versus Ribosomal RNA depletion methods for RNA-seq

ABSTRACT: Methods: RNA-sequencing was performed on matched samples obtained across several different gene expression measurement methods including: (a) fresh-frozen (FF) RNA samples by mRNA-seq, Ribo-zero and DSN and (b) FFPE samples by Ribo-zero and DSN. We also assayed the matched samples with Agilent microarray. RNA-seq data was compared on the rRNA-removal efficiency, genome profile, library complexity, coverage uniformity and quantitative cosinstency across protocols and with microarray data. Results: Compared to mRNA-seq, Ribo-zero provides equivalent percentage of rRNA component, genome-based mapped reads, and consistent quantification of transcripts. Moreover, Ribo-zero and DSN protocols achieve concordant transcript profiling in FFPE samples, and provide substantially more information on non-poly(A) RNA, which cannot be captured by mRNA-seq. Therefore, our study provides evidence that RNA-sequencing can generate accurate and reproducible transcript quantification using FFPE tissues. mRNA profile of 11 breast tumors were assayed by Agilent microarray, and by RNA-sequencing on libraries including: (a) fresh-frozen (FF) RNA samples by mRNA-seq, Ribo-zero and DSN and (b) FFPE samples by Ribo-zero and DSN, using Illunia HiSeq2000 2x50bp. RNA-Seq raw data is to be made available through dbGaP (controlled access) due to patient privacy concerns: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gap/?term=phs000676

ORGANISM(S): Homo sapiens

SUBMITTER: Zhao W

PROVIDER: S-ECPF-GEOD-51783 | biostudies-other | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:RNA sequencing (RNA-Seq) is often used for transcriptome profiling as well as the identification of novel transcripts and alternative splicing events. Typically, RNA-Seq libraries are prepared from total RNA using poly(A) enrichment of the mRNA (mRNA-Seq) to remove ribosomal RNA (rRNA), however, this method fails to capture non-poly(A) transcripts or partially degraded mRNAs. Hence, a mRNA-Seq protocol will not be compatible for use with RNAs coming from Formalin-Fixed and Paraffin-Embedded (FFPE) samples.To address the desire to perform RNA-Seq on FFPE materials, we evaluated two different library preparation protocols that could be compatible for use with small RNA fragments. We obtained paired Fresh Frozen (FF) and FFPE RNAs from multiple tumors and subjected these to different gene expression profiling methods. We tested 11 human breast tumor samples using: (a) FF RNAs by microarray, mRNA-Seq, Ribo-Zero-Seq and DSN-Seq (Duplex-Specific Nuclease) and (b) FFPE RNAs by Ribo-Zero-Seq and DSN-Seq. We also performed these different RNA-Seq protocols using 10 TCGA tumors as a validation set.The data from paired RNA samples showed high concordance in transcript quantification across all protocols and between FF and FFPE RNAs. In both FF and FFPE, Ribo-Zero-Seq removed rRNA with comparable efficiency as mRNA-Seq, and it provided an equivalent or less biased coverage on gene 3' ends. Compared to mRNA-Seq where 69% of bases were mapped to the transcriptome, DSN-Seq and Ribo-Zero-Seq contained significantly fewer reads mapping to the transcriptome (20-30%); in these RNA-Seq protocols, many if not most reads mapped to intronic regions. Approximately 14 million reads in mRNA-Seq and 45-65 million reads in Ribo-Zero-Seq or DSN-Seq were required to achieve the same gene detection levels as a standard Agilent DNA microarray.Our results demonstrate that compared to mRNA-Seq and microarrays, Ribo-Zero-Seq provides equivalent rRNA removal efficiency, coverage uniformity, genome-based mapped reads, and consistently high quality quantification of transcripts. Moreover, Ribo-Zero-Seq and DSN-Seq have consistent transcript quantification using FFPE RNAs, suggesting that RNA-Seq can be used with FFPE-derived RNAs for gene expression profiling.

Project description:A significant challenge to the effective application of RNA-seq to the complete transcript analysis of low quantity and/or degraded samples is the amplification of minimal input RNA to enable sequencing library construction. Several strategies have been commercialized in order to facilitate this goal. However, each strategy has its own specific protocols and methodology, and each may introduce unique bias and in some cases show specific preference for a collection of sequences. Our wider investigation of human spermatozoal RNAs was able to reveal their complexity despite being generally characterized by low quantity and high fragmentation. In this study, the following four commercially available RNA-seq amplification and library protocols for the preparation of low quantity/highly fragmented samples, SMARTer™ Ultra Low RNA (SU) for Illumina® Sequencing, SeqPlex RNA Amplification (SP), Ovation® RNA-Seq System V2 (OR), and Ovation® RNA-Seq Formalin Fixed Paraffin Embedded System (FFPES) were assessed using human sperm RNAs. Further investigation analyzed the effects on the end results of two different library preparation methods, Encore NGS Multiplex System I (Enc) and Ovation Ultralow Library Systems (UL), that appeared best suited to this type of RNA, along with other potential confounding factors such as FFPE preservation. Our results indicate that for each library preparation protocol, the differences in the initial amount of input RNA and choice of RNA purification step do not generate marked differences in terms of RNA profiling. However, substantial disparity is introduced by individual amplification methods prior to library construction. These significant differences may be caused by the different priming methods or amplification strategies used in each of the four different protocols examined. The observation of intra-sample variation introduced by the choice of protocol highlights the role that external factors play in planning and subsequent reliable interpretation of results of any RNA-seq experiment.

Dataset Information

Comparison of Poly(A) capture versus Ribosomal RNA depletion methods for RNA-seq

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets