Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Siva
    Member
    • Nov 2008
    • 57

    #1

    RNA seq: handling samples after re-sequencing

    I set up an RNA seq experiment with 4 samples and 4 bioreplicates each. I now have a total of 16 fastq files. However, of these, 8 are going to be resequenced because number of reads were too low (though still usable). I was told that it was technical issue related to quantifying the library at the sequencing facility. When I get the new set of 8 files, how should I handle them:

    1. As a completely separate technical replicate? (The same library will be used for re-sequencing)
    2. Merge the BAM files together? (e.g., BR1a.BAM + BR1b.BAM)....concatenate BAMs or merge the raw reads together? (e.g.., BR1a.fastq + BR1b.fastq) concatenate fastqs?

    Which of the above will give me greater statistical power. How will I make better use of the fact that I will have resequenced the same library deeper?

    Thanks
    Siva
  • Bukowski
    Senior Member
    • Jan 2010
    • 388

    #2
    It depends what your intention for the experiment is surely? If you need extra depth you could just combine the Fastq and align.

    If you're just interested in differential expression then this paper might convince you to use them as biological replicates:

    High-throughput sequencing of RNA transcripts (RNA-seq) has become the method of choice for detection of differential expression (DE). Concurrent with the growing popularity of this technology there has been a significant research effort devoted towards understanding the statistical properties of this data and the development of analysis methods. We report on a comprehensive evaluation of the commonly used DE methods using the SEQC benchmark data set. We evaluate a number of key features including: assessment of normalization, accuracy of DE detection, modeling of genes expressed in only one condition, and the impact of sequencing depth and number of replications on identifying DE genes. We find significant differences among the methods with no single method consistently outperforming the others. Furthermore, the performance of array-based approach is comparable to methods customized for RNA-seq data. Perhaps most importantly, our results demonstrate that increasing the number of replicate samples provides significantly more detection power than increased sequencing depth.

    Comment

    • Siva
      Member
      • Nov 2008
      • 57

      #3
      Originally posted by Bukowski View Post
      It depends what your intention for the experiment is surely? If you need extra depth you could just combine the Fastq and align.

      If you're just interested in differential expression then this paper might convince you to use them as biological replicates:

      http://arxiv.org/abs/1301.5277
      My immediate aim to find differentially expressed genes. However I am also interested in more depth. Will be useful in analyzing novel genes.

      I will go through this paper. However, I was under the impression that treating them as a bioreps might actually lead to higher occurrence of type 1 error in differential expression analysis.

      Thanks much
      Siva

      Comment

      • chadn737
        Senior Member
        • Jan 2009
        • 392

        #4
        If they are from the same libraries then they are not biological replicates and should not be treated as such.

        In cases where you multiplex samples and spread them across different flow cells or runs, you can simply combine them as lane effects will apply to all the samples. To see a detailed description of this, read the paper by Auer and Doerge: http://www.genetics.org/content/185/2/405.abstract

        However, since you will only be doing further sequencing on 8 of the samples, this is a far more complicated design. I would say if you want to keep all the data, then you should use the multifactorial capabilities of tools like DESeq or EdgeR to account for this.

        Comment

        Latest Articles

        Collapse

        • kinpict.com
          Reply to 16S/ITS Profiling vs. Shotgun Metagenomics: What Changes in Your Workflow?
          by kinpict.com
          The part about this topic feels surprisingly grounded, and the details on the page is the bit that made me slow down. I’d keep <a href="https://kinpict.com/">ai family photo generator</a> bookmarked for later.
          Today, 06:37 PM
        • SEQadmin2
          16S/ITS Profiling vs. Shotgun Metagenomics: What Changes in Your Workflow?
          by SEQadmin2





          NGS has revolutionized clinical microbiology by offering new ways to identify and surveil pathogens without prior knowledge of the target. One popular approach is 16S rRNA and ITS amplicon sequencing, which targets specific microbial markers. But studies are increasingly incorporating shotgun metagenomics, a technique that sequences all DNA from a sample without targeting specific microbial markers. This approach allows more detailed taxonomic classification,...
          10-30-2026, 06:46 AM

        ad_right_rmr

        Collapse

        News

        Collapse

        Topics Statistics Last Post
        Started by SEQadmin2, 11-12-2026, 07:59 AM
        0 responses
        27 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post SEQadmin2  
        Started by SEQadmin2, 11-05-2026, 09:25 AM
        0 responses
        35 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post SEQadmin2  
        Started by SEQadmin2, 11-03-2026, 11:54 AM
        2 responses
        56 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post kinpict.com  
        Started by SEQadmin2, 10-28-2026, 09:57 AM
        0 responses
        175 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post SEQadmin2  
        Working...