ArticleBMC bioinformatics2007
Unexpected observations after mapping LongSAGE tags to the human genome.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Digital gene expression approach over multiple RNA-Seq data sets to detect neoblast transcriptional changes in Schmidtea mediterranea.BMC genomics · 2015Article
- 5'-Serial Analysis of Gene Expression studies reveal a transcriptomic switch during fruiting body development in Coprinopsis cinerea.BMC genomics · 2013Article
- Increased frequency of single base substitutions in a population of transcripts expressed in cancer cells.BMC cancer · 2012Article
- Whole genome wide expression profiles of Vitis amurensis grape responding to downy mildew by using Solexa sequencing technology.BMC plant biology · 2010Article
- Global gene expression reveals a set of new genes involved in the modification of cells during erythroid differentiation.Cell proliferation · 2010Article
- Expressed sequence tag analysis of adult human optic nerve for NEIBank: identification of cell type and tissue markers.BMC neuroscience · 2009Article
- Using reads to annotate the genome: influence of length, background distribution, and sequence errors on prediction capacity.Nucleic acids research · 2009Article
- A score system for quality evaluation of RNA sequence tags: an improvement for gene expression profiling.BMC bioinformatics · 2009Article
- Human neural crest cells display molecular and phenotypic hallmarks of stem cells.Human molecular genetics · 2008Article
- Analysis of wheat SAGE tags reveals evidence for widespread antisense transcription.BMC genomics · 2008Article
- A combination of LongSAGE with Solexa sequencing is well suited to explore the depth and the complexity of transcriptome.BMC genomics · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSAGE has been used widely to study the expression of known transcripts, but much less to annotate new transcribed regions. LongSAGE produces tags that are sufficiently long to be reliably mapped to a whole-genome sequence. Here we used this property to study the position of human LongSAGE tags obtained from all public libraries. We focused mainly on tags that do not map to known transcripts.
resultsUsing a published error rate in SAGE libraries, we first removed the tags likely to result from sequencing errors. We then observed that an unexpectedly large number of the remaining tags still did not match the genome sequence. Some of these correspond to parts of human mRNAs, such as polyA tails, junctions between two exons and polymorphic regions of transcripts. Another non-negligible proportion can be attributed to contamination by murine transcripts and to residual sequencing errors. After filtering out our data with these screens to ensure that our dataset is highly reliable, we studied the tags that map once to the genome. 31% of these tags correspond to unannotated transcripts. The others map to known transcribed regions, but many of them (nearly half) are located either in antisense or in new variants of these known transcripts.
conclusionWe performed a comprehensive study of all publicly available human LongSAGE tags, and carefully verified the reliability of these data. We found the potential origin of many tags that did not match the human genome sequence. The properties of the remaining tags imply that the level of sequencing error may have been under-estimated. The frequency of tags matching once the genome sequence but not in an annotated exon suggests that the human transcriptome is much more complex than shown by the current human genome annotations, with many new splicing variants and antisense transcripts. SAGE data is appropriate to map new transcripts to the genome, as demonstrated by the high rate of cross-validation of the corresponding tags using other methods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.