BACKGROUND: The reproducibility of gene expression measured by RNA sequencing (RNA-Seq) is dependent on the sequencing depth. While unmapped or non-exonic reads do not contribute to gene expression quantification, duplicate reads contribute to the quantification but are not informative for reproducibility. We show that mapped, exonic, non-duplicate (MEND) reads are a useful measure of reproducibility of RNA-Seq datasets used for gene expression analysis. FINDINGS: In bulk RNA-Seq datasets from 2,179 tumors in 48 cohorts, the fraction of reads that contribute to the reproducibility of gene expression analysis varies greatly. Unmapped reads constitute 1-77% of all reads (median [IQR], 3% [3-6%]); duplicate reads constitute 3-100% of mapped reads (median [IQR], 27% [13-43%]); and non-exonic reads constitute 4-97% of mapped, non-duplicate reads (median [IQR], 25% [16-37%]). MEND reads constitute 0-79% of total reads (median [IQR], 50% [30-61%]). CONCLUSIONS: Because not all reads in an RNA-Seq dataset are informative for reproducibility of gene expression measurements and the fraction of reads that are informative varies, we propose reporting a dataset's sequencing depth in MEND reads, which definitively inform the reproducibility of gene expression, rather than total, mapped, or exonic reads. We provide a Docker image containing (i) the existing required tools (RSeQC, sambamba, and samblaster) and (ii) a custom script to calculate MEND reads from RNA-Seq data files. We recommend that all RNA-Seq gene expression experiments, sensitivity studies, and depth recommendations use MEND units for sequencing depth.
BACKGROUND: The reproducibility of gene expression measured by RNA sequencing (RNA-Seq) is dependent on the sequencing depth. While unmapped or non-exonic reads do not contribute to gene expression quantification, duplicate reads contribute to the quantification but are not informative for reproducibility. We show that mapped, exonic, non-duplicate (MEND) reads are a useful measure of reproducibility of RNA-Seq datasets used for gene expression analysis. FINDINGS: In bulk RNA-Seq datasets from 2,179 tumors in 48 cohorts, the fraction of reads that contribute to the reproducibility of gene expression analysis varies greatly. Unmapped reads constitute 1-77% of all reads (median [IQR], 3% [3-6%]); duplicate reads constitute 3-100% of mapped reads (median [IQR], 27% [13-43%]); and non-exonic reads constitute 4-97% of mapped, non-duplicate reads (median [IQR], 25% [16-37%]). MEND reads constitute 0-79% of total reads (median [IQR], 50% [30-61%]). CONCLUSIONS: Because not all reads in an RNA-Seq dataset are informative for reproducibility of gene expression measurements and the fraction of reads that are informative varies, we propose reporting a dataset's sequencing depth in MEND reads, which definitively inform the reproducibility of gene expression, rather than total, mapped, or exonic reads. We provide a Docker image containing (i) the existing required tools (RSeQC, sambamba, and samblaster) and (ii) a custom script to calculate MEND reads from RNA-Seq data files. We recommend that all RNA-Seq gene expression experiments, sensitivity studies, and depth recommendations use MEND units for sequencing depth.
Authors: Peter A C 't Hoen; Marc R Friedländer; Jonas Almlöf; Michael Sammeth; Irina Pulyakhina; Seyed Yahya Anvar; Jeroen F J Laros; Henk P J Buermans; Olof Karlberg; Mathias Brännvall; Johan T den Dunnen; Gert-Jan B van Ommen; Ivo G Gut; Roderic Guigó; Xavier Estivill; Ann-Christine Syvänen; Emmanouil T Dermitzakis; Tuuli Lappalainen Journal: Nat Biotechnol Date: 2013-09-15 Impact factor: 54.908
Authors: Alexander Dobin; Carrie A Davis; Felix Schlesinger; Jorg Drenkow; Chris Zaleski; Sonali Jha; Philippe Batut; Mark Chaisson; Thomas R Gingeras Journal: Bioinformatics Date: 2012-10-25 Impact factor: 6.937
Authors: John Vivian; Arjun Arkal Rao; Frank Austin Nothaft; Christopher Ketchum; Joel Armstrong; Adam Novak; Jacob Pfeil; Jake Narkizian; Alden D Deran; Audrey Musselman-Brown; Hannes Schmidt; Peter Amstutz; Brian Craft; Mary Goldman; Kate Rosenbloom; Melissa Cline; Brian O'Connor; Megan Hanna; Chet Birger; W James Kent; David A Patterson; Anthony D Joseph; Jingchun Zhu; Sasha Zaranek; Gad Getz; David Haussler; Benedict Paten Journal: Nat Biotechnol Date: 2017-04-11 Impact factor: 54.908
Authors: Anna V Klepikova; Artem S Kasianov; Mikhail S Chesnokov; Natalia L Lazarevich; Aleksey A Penin; Maria Logacheva Journal: PeerJ Date: 2017-03-16 Impact factor: 2.984
Authors: Holly C Beale; Jacquelyn M Roger; Matthew A Cattle; Liam T McKay; Drew K A Thompson; Katrina Learned; A Geoffrey Lyle; Ellen T Kephart; Rob Currie; Du Linh Lam; Lauren Sanders; Jacob Pfeil; John Vivian; Isabel Bjork; Sofie R Salama; David Haussler; Olena M Vaske Journal: Gigascience Date: 2021-03-13 Impact factor: 6.524
Authors: Holly C Beale; Jacquelyn M Roger; Matthew A Cattle; Liam T McKay; Drew K A Thompson; Katrina Learned; A Geoffrey Lyle; Ellen T Kephart; Rob Currie; Du Linh Lam; Lauren Sanders; Jacob Pfeil; John Vivian; Isabel Bjork; Sofie R Salama; David Haussler; Olena M Vaske Journal: Gigascience Date: 2021-03-13 Impact factor: 6.524