SEQanswers

Go Back   SEQanswers > Applications Forums > RNA Sequencing



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Raw read counts for RNAseq biofreak Introductions 13 01-16-2013 05:28 AM
who coined RNAseq? RNAseq as an alignment first approach only brachysclereid Bioinformatics 3 01-10-2012 12:17 PM
What is the optimal read length to quantify splice variants: 50, 76 or 100 bp? Joke van Vugt RNA Sequencing 5 10-12-2011 04:19 AM
Raw read counts for RNAseq biofreak RNA Sequencing 2 06-15-2011 05:56 AM
Tophat/Cufflinks/RNASeq short-read aligners and pseudogenes sjm RNA Sequencing 2 01-20-2010 05:09 AM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-03-2010, 07:40 AM   #1
cjohnson
Junior Member
 
Location: Texas

Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2
Default Optimal read lenght for RNASeq

Has anyone here done any research on optimal read length for doing RNASeq?

I've been able to find one paper so far that looked at read length (Li et al). Suggesting that shorted reads <35 are best.

I'm sure like everything it comes down to your experimental question, but I'm looking for some general advice.

Thanks,

Last edited by cjohnson; 11-03-2010 at 07:59 AM.
cjohnson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2010, 04:18 PM   #2
jdanderson
Member
 
Location: Davis, CA

Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 45
Default

Hello cjohnson,

I am far from an expert on this matter, but to get the ball rolling on your thread:

In general, the longer the better and paired ends (especially) are helpful. I think the added value is greater resolution (and statistical power) of smaller genes and as well as lowly expressed genes. I'm sure cost is a concern for you, as it is for everyone (if not, then i envy you), so you may find that adding a little read length is a bit cheaper than running PE's. If you are using a core facility, however, you have to consider how much of the slide you are using (# of lanes) versus how popular a particular read length is with your type of run, PE or SE. I've heard that 40bp SE reads are the minimum you should try to do, and of course the more biological replicates the more powerful your analysis will be.

Hope this was some modicum of help.

Cheers,
Johnathon

Last edited by jdanderson; 11-03-2010 at 04:37 PM.
jdanderson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2010, 04:32 PM   #3
Michael.James.Clark
Senior Member
 
Location: Palo Alto

Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 213
Default

I'm interested in this question as well. Haven't done RNAseq myself for a long time, and back then it was 36bp PE. Now I've read 75bp SE is pretty standard and am considering 100bp PE. Anyone have a solid answer?
__________________
Mendelian Disorder: A blogshare of random useful information for general public consumption. [Blog]
Breakway: A Program to Identify Structural Variations in Genomic Data [Website] [Forum Post]
Projects: U87MG whole genome sequence [Website] [Paper]
Michael.James.Clark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 09:06 AM   #4
mnkyboy
Member
 
Location: Seattle, WA

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 87
Default

If it is for mRNA-seq profiling then you will do well with just 54 bp. If it is for whole transcriptome, junctions, and structure longer is better. PE obviously helps there. But you may not get PE support for directional libraries.

We like 76 directional for whole transcriptome but that is because at 100 we start seeing that we will sequence the adapters sometimes.
mnkyboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 12:50 PM   #5
cndewey
Junior Member
 
Location: Madison, WI

Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2
Default

I'm an author on the Li et al. paper that was cited, so I thought I would add my thoughts.

If your only goal is to do quantitation and/or differential expression, we've found that the number of reads matters more than read length once you reach a minimum read length of about 25. So if you have a choice between one lane of 50bp SE vs. two lanes of 25bp SE, you should go with the two lane option. Similarly, two lanes of 25bp SE is better than one 25bp PE run. Of course, if you only have one lane to work with, having longer reads won't hurt, unless the number of valid reads goes down.

Another group has confirmed our results on this:
Nicolae et al.

If you want to do reference-based or de novo transcriptome assembly, then longer reads or PE reads will probably be more useful.
cndewey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2010, 07:12 PM   #6
malachig
Senior Member
 
Location: WashU

Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 117
Default

I agree with others here that the greater the length the better and paired is more desirable than single end. For paired-ends I wouldn't go shorter than 40 and for single end, no shorter than 50. I also agree that depending on application, depth may be more important than read length.

An obvious consideration related to read length is mapability of your reads. If you want to have some numbers to justify your choice you can download the 'mapability' tracks from UCSC and consider how many bases of the transcriptome (i.e. exonic bases) are uniquely mapable at various read lengths. For hg19, this has been pre-calculated for 24-, 36-, 40-, 50-, 75- and 100-mer sequences with up to two mismatches allowed.

Another suggestion. There are a number of caveats associated with comparing libraries of different length. So whatever you decide for length and paired vs. un-paired, stick with that for all libraries if you can...
malachig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2010, 08:34 PM   #7
honey
Senior Member
 
Location: Pittsburgh

Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 151
Default

I was wondering what parameters should be optimal to get the out put in TopHAT.
Thanks
honey is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off




All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO