Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40437619›Full record

ArticleGenome biology2025

The impact of PCR duplication on RNAseq data generated using NovaSeq 6000, NovaSeq X, AVITI, and G4 sequencers.

Natalia Zajac, Ioannis S Vlachos, Sija Sajibu, Lennart Opitz, Shuoshuo Wang, Sridar V Chittur, Christopher E Mason, Kevin L Knudtson, John M Ashton, Hubert Rehrauer and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

11 authors.

Natalia ZajacFunctional Genomics Center Zurich, ETH Zurich and University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-9572-3684
Ioannis S VlachosSpatial Technologies Unit, Department of Pathology, HMS Initiative for RNA Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Sija SajibuFunctional Genomics Center Zurich, ETH Zurich and University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Lennart OpitzFunctional Genomics Center Zurich, ETH Zurich and University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Shuoshuo WangSpatial Technologies Unit, Department of Pathology, HMS Initiative for RNA Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Sridar V ChitturCenter for Functional Genomics, University at Albany, State University of New York, Albany, NY, USA.
Christopher E MasonDepartment of Physiology, Biophysics and Systems Biology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Kevin L KnudtsonGenomics Division, Iowa Institute of Human Genetics, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA.
John M AshtonGenomics Research Center, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA.
Hubert RehrauerFunctional Genomics Center Zurich, ETH Zurich and University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. hubert.rehrauer@fgcz.ethz.ch.
Catharine AquinoFunctional Genomics Center Zurich, ETH Zurich and University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. catharine.aquino@fgcz.ethz.ch.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTranscriptome sequencing (RNA-seq) is a powerful technology for gene expression profiling. Selection of optimal parameters for cDNA library generation is crucial for acquisition of high-quality data. In this study, we investigate the impact of the amount of RNA and the number of PCR cycles used for sample amplification on the rate of PCR duplication and, in consequence, on the RNA-seq data quality.

resultsFor broader applicability, we sequenced the data on four short-read sequencing platforms: Illumina NovaSeq 6000, Illumina NovaSeq X, Element Biosciences AVITI, and Singular Genomics G4. The native Illumina libraries were converted for sequencing on AVITI and G4 to assess the effect of library conversion, containing additional PCR cycles. We find that the rate of PCR duplicates depends on the combined effect of RNA input material and the number of PCR cycles used for amplification. For input amounts lower than 125 ng, 34-96% of reads were discarded via deduplication with the percentage increasing with lower input amount and decreasing with increasing PCR cycles. The reduced read diversity for low input amounts leads to fewer genes detected and increased noise in expression counts.

conclusionsData generated with each of the four sequencing platforms presents similar associations between starting material amount and the number of PCR cycles on PCR duplicates, a similar number of detected genes, and comparable gene expression profiles.

Indexed as

High-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingPolymerase Chain ReactionRNA-SeqSequence Analysis, RNAGene Expression ProfilingGene LibraryHumans

Identifiers

PMID40437619
PMCPMC12117910

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.