| Literature DB >> 26823975 |
Erica E Tassone1, Scott M Geib2, Brian Hall3, Jeffrey A Fabrick4, Colin S Brent4, J Joe Hull4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The plant bug Lygus hesperus Knight is a polyphagous pest of many economically important crops. Despite its pest status, little is known about the molecular mechanisms responsible for much of the biology of this species. Earlier Lygus transcriptome assemblies were limited by low read depth, or because they focused on specific conditions. To generate a more comprehensive transcriptome, we supplemented previous datasets with new reads corresponding to specific tissues (heads, antennae, and male reproductive tissues). This transcriptome augments current Lygus molecular resources and provides the foundational knowledge critical for future comparative studies.Entities:
Keywords: Lygus hesperus; Miridae; Plant bug; RNA-Seq; Transcriptome; Trinity
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26823975 PMCID: PMC4730634 DOI: 10.1186/s13742-016-0109-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Gigascience ISSN: 2047-217X Impact factor: 6.524
Accession numbers for L. hesperus sequence reads and assembled transcripts
| Sample | Short Read Archive | BioSample | BioProject |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10-day-old adultsa | |||
| 4 °C | SRX483635, SRX483674, SRX483877 | SAMN02679940-42 | PRJNA238835 |
| 25 °C | SRX483950, SRX484037, SRX484042 | SAMN02679943-45 | " |
| 39 °C | SRX484076, SRX484077, SRX484079 | SAMN02679946-48 | " |
| Antennae | |||
| Male | SRX317887, SRX317888 | SAMN02222162-63 | PRJNA210219 |
| Female | SRX317885, SRX317886 | SAMN02222160-61 | " |
| Accessory Gland | |||
| Mated | SRX318362, SRX318363 | SAMN02222164-65 | PRJNA210220 |
| Unmated | SRX318364, SRX318365 | SAMN02222166-67 | " |
| Head | SRX1072689, SRX1155625, SRX1155629 | SAMN03792993-95 | PRJNA284294 |
aData from Hull et al. 2014 [3]
Transcriptome assembly and annotation statistics compared with previous Lygus transcriptomes
| Transcriptome | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Assembly | ||||
| Total no. read pairs | 262,555 | 1,429,818 | 144,898,116 | 437,850,562 |
| Normalized reads ( | - | - | 16,191,383 | 32,342,216 |
| Total no. transcripts | 6970 | 36,131 | 45,706 | 22,022 |
| Average transcript length | 392 (100–3466) | 725 (2–13,480) | 2237 (300–23,322) | 2073 (297–23,350) |
| Total assembled bases (all transcripts) | - | 32,252,977 | 102,246,199 | 45,687,929 |
| Total assembled bases (longest transcript per unigene) | - | 28.8 Mb | 39.8 Mb | 31.6 Mb |
| N50 (all transcripts) | - | 2430 | 2989 | 2610 |
| N50 (longest transcript per unigene) | - | 1849 | 2638 | 2726 |
| %GC | - | 0.41 | 0.44 | 0.45 |
| Proteins with complete ORF (%) | - | - | - | 13,689 (62.1 %) |
| Annotation | ||||
| No. transcripts with a BLAST hit | 3126 (44.9 %) | 19,393 (54 %) | - | 16,942 (76.9 %) |
| No. transcripts with GO term | 2196 (31.5 %) | 7898 (21 %) | - | 12,114 (54.9 %) |
| PFAM | - | 3705 (22.2 %) | - | 14,575 (66.1 %) |
Data from: aMagalhaes et al. 2013 [11]; bHull et al. 2013 [2]; cHull et al. 2014 [3]
BUSCOa analysis of assembly completeness
| Species | Complete (%) | Duplicated (%) | Fragment (%) | Missing (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| 454-basedb | 56 | 18 | 13 | 29 |
| Illumina-thermalc | 77 | 43 | 11 | 10 |
| Illumina | 74 | 33 | 7.3 | 17 |
| Select Insect Transcriptomesd | ||||
|
| 64 | - | 19 | 15 |
|
| 6.4 | - | 6.3 | 87 |
|
| 73 | - | 11 | 14 |
|
| 8.5 | - | 21 | 70 |
| Select Insect Genomesd | ||||
|
| 92 | 3.9 | 6.1 | 1.6 |
|
| 72 | 6.1 | 15 | 12 |
|
| 98 | 6.4 | 0.6 | 0.3 |
aSimão et al. 2015 [13]
bHull et al. 2013 [2]
cHull et al. 2014 [3]
dsee Supplementary Data [12] for arthropod BUSCO assessments
Fig. 1Relative transcript depth of the respective L. hesperus transcriptomes. tBLASTx analyses were performed using queries corresponding to genes of interest identified in genome assemblies of Nilaparvata lugens or Rhodnius prolixus. The L. hesperus transcriptomes analyzed include the initial Roche 454-based assembly [2], an Illumina-based thermal assembly [3], and the current assembly. tBLASTx search criteria for the neuropeptide analysis used an e-value of 10−1, whereas the G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) and chemosensory receptor analyses used an e-value of 10−5 and transcripts ≥300 nt in length