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?
Unconfigured Ad
Collapse
X
-
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:
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.Single reads are a lot less expensive and I may be able to afford to sequence the libraries deeper.
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
-
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
-
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
-
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...-
Channel: Articles
07-31-2026, 11:01 AM -
-
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...-
Channel: Articles
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
by SEQadmin2
08-06-2026, 07:41 AM
|
||
|
Started by SEQadmin2, 08-03-2026, 10:13 AM
|
0 responses
37 views
0 reactions
|
Last Post
by SEQadmin2
08-03-2026, 10:13 AM
|
||
|
Started by SEQadmin2, 07-31-2026, 02:55 AM
|
0 responses
43 views
0 reactions
|
Last Post
by SEQadmin2
07-31-2026, 02:55 AM
|
||
|
Started by SEQadmin2, 07-24-2026, 12:17 PM
|
0 responses
26 views
0 reactions
|
Last Post
by SEQadmin2
07-24-2026, 12:17 PM
|
Comment