Literature DB >> 33822878

Choice of assemblers has a critical impact on de novo assembly of SARS-CoV-2 genome and characterizing variants.

Rashedul Islam1, Rajan Saha Raju2, Nazia Tasnim3, Istiak Hossain Shihab4, Maruf Ahmed Bhuiyan5, Yusha Araf6, Tofazzal Islam7.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has become a global pandemic following its initial emergence in China. SARS-CoV-2 has a positive-sense single-stranded RNA virus genome of around 30Kb. Using next-generation sequencing technologies, a large number of SARS-CoV-2 genomes are being sequenced at an unprecedented rate and being deposited in public repositories. For the de novo assembly of the SARS-CoV-2 genomes, a myriad of assemblers is being used, although their impact on the assembly quality has not been characterized for this virus. In this study, we aim to understand the variabilities on assembly qualities due to the choice of the assemblers.
RESULTS: We performed 6648 de novo assemblies of 416 SARS-CoV-2 samples using eight different assemblers with different k-mer lengths. We used Illumina paired-end sequencing reads and compared the assembly quality of those assemblers. We showed that the choice of assembler plays a significant role in reconstructing the SARS-CoV-2 genome. Two metagenomic assemblers, e.g. MEGAHIT and metaSPAdes, performed better compared with others in most of the assembly quality metrics including, recovery of a larger fraction of the genome, constructing larger contigs and higher N50, NA50 values, etc. We showed that at least 09% (259/2873) of the variants present in the assemblies between MEGAHIT and metaSPAdes are unique to one of the assembly methods.
CONCLUSION: Our analyses indicate the critical role of assembly methods for assembling SARS-CoV-2 genome using short reads and their impact on variant characterization. This study could help guide future studies to determine the best-suited assembler for the de novo assembly of virus genomes.
© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; benchmarking; de novo assembly; short-read; variant

Year:  2021        PMID: 33822878      PMCID: PMC8083570          DOI: 10.1093/bib/bbab102

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brief Bioinform        ISSN: 1467-5463            Impact factor:   11.622


  28 in total

1.  Velvet: algorithms for de novo short read assembly using de Bruijn graphs.

Authors:  Daniel R Zerbino; Ewan Birney
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2008-03-18       Impact factor: 9.043

2.  QUAST: quality assessment tool for genome assemblies.

Authors:  Alexey Gurevich; Vladislav Saveliev; Nikolay Vyahhi; Glenn Tesler
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2013-02-19       Impact factor: 6.937

3.  A post-assembly genome-improvement toolkit (PAGIT) to obtain annotated genomes from contigs.

Authors:  Martin T Swain; Isheng J Tsai; Samual A Assefa; Chris Newbold; Matthew Berriman; Thomas D Otto
Journal:  Nat Protoc       Date:  2012-06-07       Impact factor: 13.491

4.  MultiQC: summarize analysis results for multiple tools and samples in a single report.

Authors:  Philip Ewels; Måns Magnusson; Sverker Lundin; Max Käller
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2016-06-16       Impact factor: 6.937

5.  Benchmarking viromics: an in silico evaluation of metagenome-enabled estimates of viral community composition and diversity.

Authors:  Simon Roux; Joanne B Emerson; Emiley A Eloe-Fadrosh; Matthew B Sullivan
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2017-09-21       Impact factor: 2.984

6.  Nextstrain: real-time tracking of pathogen evolution.

Authors:  James Hadfield; Colin Megill; Sidney M Bell; John Huddleston; Barney Potter; Charlton Callender; Pavel Sagulenko; Trevor Bedford; Richard A Neher
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2018-12-01       Impact factor: 6.931

7.  Choice of assembly software has a critical impact on virome characterisation.

Authors:  Thomas D S Sutton; Adam G Clooney; Feargal J Ryan; R Paul Ross; Colin Hill
Journal:  Microbiome       Date:  2019-01-28       Impact factor: 14.650

Review 8.  Viral phylodynamics.

Authors:  Erik M Volz; Katia Koelle; Trevor Bedford
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2013-03-21       Impact factor: 4.475

9.  Trimmomatic: a flexible trimmer for Illumina sequence data.

Authors:  Anthony M Bolger; Marc Lohse; Bjoern Usadel
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2014-04-01       Impact factor: 6.937

10.  A Novel Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in China, 2019.

Authors:  Na Zhu; Dingyu Zhang; Wenling Wang; Xingwang Li; Bo Yang; Jingdong Song; Xiang Zhao; Baoying Huang; Weifeng Shi; Roujian Lu; Peihua Niu; Faxian Zhan; Xuejun Ma; Dayan Wang; Wenbo Xu; Guizhen Wu; George F Gao; Wenjie Tan
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2020-01-24       Impact factor: 91.245

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.