Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36517904›Full record

ArticlePlant methods2022

Species-specific basecallers improve actual accuracy of nanopore sequencing in plants.

Scott Ferguson, Todd McLay, Rose L Andrew, Jeremy J Bruhl, Benjamin Schwessinger, Justin Borevitz, Ashley Jones

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plant methods, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Nanopore Sequencing for Chikungunya Virus: Principles and Application.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2027
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors.

Scott FergusonResearch School of Biology, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia. scott.ferguson@anu.edu.au.
Todd McLayNational Herbarium of Victoria, Royal Botanic Gardens Victoria, South Yarra, Victoria, 3004, Australia.
Rose L AndrewBotany & N.C.W. Beadle Herbarium, School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, 2351, Australia.
Jeremy J BruhlBotany & N.C.W. Beadle Herbarium, School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, 2351, Australia.
Benjamin SchwessingerResearch School of Biology, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
Justin BorevitzResearch School of Biology, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
Ashley JonesResearch School of Biology, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia. ashley.jones@anu.edu.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLong-read sequencing platforms offered by Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT) allow native DNA containing epigenetic modifications to be directly sequenced, but can be limited by lower per-base accuracies. A key step post-sequencing is basecalling, the process of converting raw electrical signals produced by the sequencing device into nucleotide sequences. This is challenging as current basecallers are primarily based on mixtures of model species for training. Here we utilise both ONT PromethION and higher accuracy PacBio Sequel II HiFi sequencing on two plants, Phebalium stellatum and Xanthorrhoea johnsonii, to train species-specific basecaller models with the aim of improving per-base accuracy. We investigate sequencing accuracies achieved by ONT basecallers and assess accuracy gains by training single-species and species-specific basecaller models. We also evaluate accuracy gains from ONT's improved flowcells (R10.4, FLO-PRO112) and sequencing kits (SQK-LSK112). For the truth dataset for both model training and accuracy assessment, we developed highly accurate, contiguous diploid reference genomes with PacBio Sequel II HiFi reads.

resultsBasecalling with ONT Guppy 5 and 6 super-accurate gave almost identical results, attaining read accuracies of 91.96% and 94.15%. Guppy's plant-specific model gave highly mixed results, attaining read accuracies of 91.47% and 96.18%. Species-specific basecalling models improved read accuracy, attaining 93.24% and 95.16% read accuracies. R10.4 sequencing kits also improve sequencing accuracy, attaining read accuracies of 95.46% (super-accurate) and 96.87% (species-specific).

conclusionsThe use of a single mixed-species basecaller model, such as ONT Guppy super-accurate, may be reducing the accuracy of nanopore sequencing, due to conflicting genome biology within the training dataset and study species. Training of single-species and genome-specific basecaller models improves read accuracy. Studies that aim to do large-scale long-read genotyping would primarily benefit from training their own basecalling models. Such studies could use sequencing accuracy gains and improving bioinformatics tools to improve study outcomes.

Indexed as

Asphodelaceae basecaller modelBasecaller trainingLong-read sequencingOxford Nanopore TechnologiesPacBioRutaceae basecaller modelSequencing accuracy

Identifiers

PMID36517904
PMCPMC9749173

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.