Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34674629›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2021

A consensus-based ensemble approach to improve transcriptome assembly.

Adam Voshall, Sairam Behera, Xiangjun Li, Xiao-Hong Yu, Kushagra Kapil, Jitender S Deogun, John Shanklin, Edgar B Cahoon, Etsuko N Moriyama

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Adam VoshallSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, 68588, USA.
Sairam BeheraDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, 68588, USA.
Xiangjun LiCenter for Plant Science Innovation, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, 68588, USA.
Xiao-Hong YuDepartment of Biochemistry and Cell Biology, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, 11794, USA.
Kushagra KapilDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, 68588, USA.
Jitender S DeogunDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, 68588, USA.
John ShanklinBiology Department, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY, 11973, USA.
Edgar B CahoonCenter for Plant Science Innovation, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, 68588, USA.
Etsuko N MoriyamaSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, 68588, USA. emoriyama2@unl.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1672-5818

Funding

National Science Foundation 1339385National Science Foundation 1557417
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSystems-level analyses, such as differential gene expression analysis, co-expression analysis, and metabolic pathway reconstruction, depend on the accuracy of the transcriptome. Multiple tools exist to perform transcriptome assembly from RNAseq data. However, assembling high quality transcriptomes is still not a trivial problem. This is especially the case for non-model organisms where adequate reference genomes are often not available. Different methods produce different transcriptome models and there is no easy way to determine which are more accurate. Furthermore, having alternative-splicing events exacerbates such difficult assembly problems. While benchmarking transcriptome assemblies is critical, this is also not trivial due to the general lack of true reference transcriptomes.

resultsIn this study, we first provide a pipeline to generate a set of the simulated benchmark transcriptome and corresponding RNAseq data. Using the simulated benchmarking datasets, we compared the performance of various transcriptome assembly approaches including both de novo and genome-guided methods. The results showed that the assembly performance deteriorates significantly when alternative transcripts (isoforms) exist or for genome-guided methods when the reference is not available from the same genome. To improve the transcriptome assembly performance, leveraging the overlapping predictions between different assemblies, we present a new consensus-based ensemble transcriptome assembly approach, ConSemble.

conclusionsWithout using a reference genome, ConSemble using four de novo assemblers achieved an accuracy up to twice as high as any de novo assemblers we compared. When a reference genome is available, ConSemble using four genome-guided assemblies removed many incorrectly assembled contigs with minimal impact on correctly assembled contigs, achieving higher precision and accuracy than individual genome-guided methods. Furthermore, ConSemble using de novo assemblers matched or exceeded the best performing genome-guided assemblers even when the transcriptomes included isoforms. We thus demonstrated that the ConSemble consensus strategy both for de novo and genome-guided assemblers can improve transcriptome assembly. The RNAseq simulation pipeline, the benchmark transcriptome datasets, and the script to perform the ConSemble assembly are all freely available from: http://bioinfolab.unl.edu/emlab/consemble/ .

Indexed as

GenomeTranscriptomeConsensusBenchmarkingDe novo assemblyEnsemble assemblyGenome-guided assemblyIlluminaRNAseqSimulationTranscriptome assembly

Identifiers

PMID34674629
PMCPMC8532302

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.