ArticleBMC genomics2015
A comprehensive evaluation of ensembl, RefSeq, and UCSC annotations in the context of RNA-seq read mapping and gene quantification.
Article in BMC genomics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 77 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
77 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Evaluation of commonly used analysis strategies for epigenome- and transcriptome-wide association studies through replication of large-scale population studies.Genome biology · 2019Pooled it
- Benchmarking RNA-seq with the Quartet and MAQC reference materials to establish best practices for accurate alternative splicing analysis.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Systematic contextual biases in SegmentNT potentially relevant to other nucleotide transformer models.Nucleic acids research · 2026Article
- A comprehensive transcriptomic dataset of Sorghum bicolor seedlings under abiotic stress conditions.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Systematic contextual biases in SegmentNT potentially relevant to other nucleotide transformer models.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- In Silico Analysis of Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2026Review
- Genome annotations matter: characterizing Ensembl hg38 annotations from 2014 to 2023.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- Differences in GenBank and RefSeq annotations may affect genomics data interpretation formSphere · 2025Article
- A comprehensive analysis of Atlantic salmon gonad and pituitary transcriptomes identifies novel players in sexual maturation.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- Quantification method affects replicability of eQTL analysis, colocalization, and TWAS.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- An updated comparison of microarray and RNA-seq for concentration response transcriptomic study: case studies with two cannabinoids, cannabichromene and cannabinol.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- Optimal Dual RNA-Seq Mapping for Accurate Pathogen Detection in Complex Eukaryotic Hosts.Bio-protocol · 2025Article
- Insights into the evolution and regulation of miRNAs from the view of their DNA replication temporal domains.Frontiers in genetics · 2025Article
- Impact of genome build on RNA-seq interpretation and diagnostics.American journal of human genetics · 2024Article
- Nucleotide-level distance metrics to quantify alternative splicing implemented in TranD.Nucleic acids research · 2024Article
- Impact of genome build on RNA-seq interpretation and diagnostics.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024Article
- Ten common issues with reference sequence databases and how to mitigate them.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2024Review
- TAGADA: a scalable pipeline to improve genome annotations with RNA-seq data.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2023Article
- Transcript assembly and annotations: Bias and adjustment.PLoS computational biology · 2023Article
- Transcriptomics for Clinical and Experimental Biology Research: Hang on a Seq.Advanced genetics (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2023Review
17 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRNA-Seq has become increasingly popular in transcriptome profiling. One aspect of transcriptome research is to quantify the expression levels of genomic elements, such as genes, their transcripts and exons. Acquiring a transcriptome expression profile requires genomic elements to be defined in the context of the genome. Multiple human genome annotation databases exist, including RefGene (RefSeq Gene), Ensembl, and the UCSC annotation database. The impact of the choice of an annotation on estimating gene expression remains insufficiently investigated.
resultsIn this paper, we systematically characterized the impact of genome annotation choice on read mapping and transcriptome quantification by analyzing a RNA-Seq dataset generated by the Human Body Map 2.0 Project. The impact of a gene model on mapping of non-junction reads is different from junction reads. For the RNA-Seq dataset with a read length of 75 bp, on average, 95% of non-junction reads were mapped to exactly the same genomic location regardless of which gene models was used. By contrast, this percentage dropped to 53% for junction reads. In addition, about 30% of junction reads failed to align without the assistance of a gene model, while 10-15% mapped alternatively. There are 21,958 common genes among RefGene, Ensembl, and UCSC annotations. When we compared the gene quantification results in RefGene and Ensembl annotations, 20% of genes are not expressed, and thus have a zero count in both annotations. Surprisingly, identical gene quantification results were obtained for only 16.3% (about one sixth) of genes. Approximately 28.1% of genes' expression levels differed by 5% or higher, and of those, the relative expression levels for 9.3% of genes (equivalent to 2038) differed by 50% or greater. The case studies revealed that the gene definition differences in gene models frequently result in inconsistency in gene quantification.
conclusionsWe demonstrated that the choice of a gene model has a dramatic effect on both gene quantification and differential analysis. Our research will help RNA-Seq data analysts to make an informed choice of gene model in practical RNA-Seq data analysis.
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.