Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • mike.t
    Member
    • Mar 2010
    • 36

    #1

    PE vs SE for RNA-Seq

    I have used paired end sequences for RNA-Seq experiments in the past with the understanding that PE reads are 'more accurate' somehow. One paper that I found says that the false positive rate is lower with PE. Single reads are a lot less expensive and I may be able to afford to sequence the libraries deeper. What do others on this forum use? PE or SE for rna-seq?
  • dpryan
    Devon Ryan
    • Jul 2011
    • 3478

    #2
    For normal differential expression single-end 50 base reads are sufficient. We tend to use paired-end reads whenever we need to look at splicing, though, since inevitably that works better.

    Comment

    • SylvainL
      Senior Member
      • Feb 2012
      • 180

      #3
      Actually, if the organism you work with is danio rerio (zebrafish), it may help to use paired-end even for single DE (a lot of duplications in this genome). For mouse or Humans, single-end are fine...

      Comment

      • prathima
        Junior Member
        • Aug 2016
        • 6

        #4
        Paired-end sequencing facilitates detection of genomic rearrangements and repetitive sequence elements, as well as gene fusions and novel transcripts.

        Comment

        • Brian Bushnell
          Super Moderator
          • Jan 2014
          • 2709

          #5
          I would always recommend PE for anything other than quantification studies. For quantification, it depends. But otherwise - per base, PE should always be cheaper than SE, and give massive advantages for accuracy.

          This:
          Single reads are a lot less expensive and I may be able to afford to sequence the libraries deeper.
          Should, in the general case, be false. I guess it depends on how you define "deeper", though. Normally I think of it in terms of fold coverage rather than the total quantity of unique fragments.

          So, it depends on the goal of your RNA-seq experiment! If you want to identify isoforms, or want maximal specificity, absolutely you should do PE. If you are just interested in differential expression of genes in general and don't care which isoforms are expressed, then SE will be more cost-effective.

          Comment

          • MikhailFokin
            Member
            • Mar 2014
            • 15

            #6
            Sorry, may be a bit off-topic. I personally use PE libraries, but just recently found the issue with read-through (when forward and reverse reads overlap completely). The question is - to drop reverse ones or leave them? Could it bias coverage and downstream DE analysis? If drop, then how to deal with less overlapped pairs? Ideally I would like to preserve non-overlapped fragments only, but not sure if there is a software capable for...

            Comment

            • Brian Bushnell
              Super Moderator
              • Jan 2014
              • 2709

              #7
              If you preserve non-overlapping fragments only, you will get a bias against shorter transcripts. So I don't suggest it. Though if you really want to, you can do so by adapter-trimming and setting the minimum length to the initial read length (filtering out anything with adapter sequence).

              Comment

              Latest Articles

              Collapse

              • SEQadmin2
                Beyond CRISPR/Cas9: Understand, Choose, and Use the Right Genome Editing Tool
                by SEQadmin2



                CRISPR/Cas9 sparked the gene editing revolution for both research and therapeutics.1 But this system still showed severe issues that limited its applications. The most prominent were the heavy reliance on PAM sequences, delivery limitations, double-stranded breaks that prompt unintended edits and cell death, and editing inefficiency (both in targeting and in knock-in reliability).

                Despite this, “CRISPR helped turn genome editing from a specialized technique into
                ...
                07-31-2026, 11:01 AM
              • SEQadmin2
                Proteomic Platforms: How to Choose the Right Analytical Strategy to Improve Detection and Clinical Applications
                by SEQadmin2


                Proteomics platforms are evolving rapidly, with advances in mass spectrometry and affinity-based approaches expanding what researchers can detect and at what scale. As the field moves toward deeper proteome coverage and clinical applications, scientists face an increasingly complex landscape of tools. This article will explore how researchers are navigating these choices to find the right platform for their work.

                The systematic characterization of the human proteome has
                ...
                07-20-2026, 11:48 AM

              ad_right_rmr

              Collapse

              News

              Collapse

              Topics Statistics Last Post
              Started by SEQadmin2, 08-06-2026, 07:41 AM
              0 responses
              23 views
              0 reactions
              Last Post SEQadmin2  
              Started by SEQadmin2, 08-03-2026, 10:13 AM
              0 responses
              37 views
              0 reactions
              Last Post SEQadmin2  
              Started by SEQadmin2, 07-31-2026, 02:55 AM
              0 responses
              43 views
              0 reactions
              Last Post SEQadmin2  
              Started by SEQadmin2, 07-24-2026, 12:17 PM
              0 responses
              26 views
              0 reactions
              Last Post SEQadmin2  
              Working...