ArticleBMC bioinformatics2015
Error correction and statistical analyses for intra-host comparisons of feline immunodeficiency virus diversity from high-throughput sequencing data.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInfection with feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) causes an immunosuppressive disease whose consequences are less severe if cats are co-infected with an attenuated FIV strain (PLV). We use virus diversity measurements, which reflect replication ability and the virus response to various conditions, to test whether diversity of virulent FIV in lymphoid tissues is altered in the presence of PLV. Our data consisted of the 3' half of the FIV genome from three tissues of animals infected with FIV alone, or with FIV and PLV, sequenced by 454 technology.
resultsSince rare variants dominate virus populations, we had to carefully distinguish sequence variation from errors due to experimental protocols and sequencing. We considered an exponential-normal convolution model used for background correction of microarray data, and modified it to formulate an error correction approach for minor allele frequencies derived from high-throughput sequencing. Similar to accounting for over-dispersion in counts, this accounts for error-inflated variability in frequencies - and quite effectively reproduces empirically observed distributions. After obtaining error-corrected minor allele frequencies, we applied ANalysis Of VAriance (ANOVA) based on a linear mixed model and found that conserved sites and transition frequencies in FIV genes differ among tissues of dual and single infected cats. Furthermore, analysis of minor allele frequencies at individual FIV genome sites revealed 242 sites significantly affected by infection status (dual vs. single) or infection status by tissue interaction. All together, our results demonstrated a decrease in FIV diversity in bone marrow in the presence of PLV. Importantly, these effects were weakened or undetectable when error correction was performed with other approaches (thresholding of minor allele frequencies; probabilistic clustering of reads). We also queried the data for cytidine deaminase activity on the viral genome, which causes an asymmetric increase in G to A substitutions, but found no evidence for this host defense strategy.
conclusionsOur error correction approach for minor allele frequencies (more sensitive and computationally efficient than other algorithms) and our statistical treatment of variation (ANOVA) were critical for effective use of high-throughput sequencing data in understanding viral diversity. We found that co-infection with PLV shifts FIV diversity from bone marrow to lymph node and spleen.
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.