| Literature DB >> 20551130 |
Regina Bohnert1, Gunnar Rätsch.
Abstract
We provide a novel web service, called rQuant.web, allowing convenient access to tools for quantitative analysis of RNA sequencing data. The underlying quantitation technique rQuant is based on quadratic programming and estimates different biases induced by library preparation, sequencing and read mapping. It can tackle multiple transcripts per gene locus and is therefore particularly well suited to quantify alternative transcripts. rQuant.web is available as a tool in a Galaxy installation at http://galaxy.fml.mpg.de. Using rQuant.web is free of charge, it is open to all users, and there is no login requirement.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2010 PMID: 20551130 PMCID: PMC2896134 DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkq448
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nucleic Acids Res ISSN: 0305-1048 Impact factor: 16.971
Figure 1.Transcript profiles: (a) Normalized read coverage with respect to the relative transcript position is shown grouped by five different transcript length bins for the C. elegans SRX001872 data set (16); (b) The key component of rQuant is to infer the underlying read coverage of all transcripts at one gene locus (two transcripts in this illustration on the right: transcript 1 is shown in orange and transcript 2 in green), such that the differences between the observed (grey) and expected (blue) read coverage is minimized. The expected read coverage is inferred from the transcript abundances w1 and w2 and the transcript profiles (shown in the graphs on the right), which are inferred simultaneously for several loci.
Evaluation of rQuant
| Approach | Pearson's correlation | |
|---|---|---|
| Across genes | Within genes | |
| Position-based with profiles | 0.882 | 0.622 |
| Segment-based with profiles | 0.818 | 0.451 |
| Position-based without profiles | 0.857 | 0.511 |
| Segment-based without profiles | 0.800 | 0.402 |
We compared the full version of rQuant to versions that use averages of read coverages in exon segments instead of considering each position separately and/or do not estimate density biases. We used a set of simulated reads from alternative transcripts with known expression level [for details cf. (4)]. The Pearson's correlation between true and inferred abundance was calculated across all transcripts, as well as the average of Pearson's correlation within alternative transcripts of each gene.