ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025
To join or not to join: handling biological replicates in long-read RNA sequencing data.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Long-read RNA sequencing (lrRNA-seq) has revolutionized transcriptomics facilitating the study of alternative splicing and resulting in identification of thousands of novel transcripts. While isoform identification has received significant attention, the handling of biologically replicated lrRNA-seq datasets remains less explored. However, how multiple samples are combined in a lrRNA-seq study may strongly impact transcript identification. This study defines and evaluates two strategies for obtaining consensus transcriptomes from multi-sample lrRNA-seq data: "Join & Call", where reads from all samples are combined before transcript identification, and "Call & Join", where transcript identification is performed on individual samples before combining the resulting annotations. We applied these strategies to a highly replicated dataset of mouse brain and kidney tissues, using both PacBio and ONT technologies, across six widely used transcript reconstruction tools. Our results indicate that the optimal strategy depends on the chosen computational tool and research objective. We found that Join & Call is generally more suitable for discovering rarely occurring, novel isoforms, as pooling evidence increases confidence in calling lowly-expressed transcripts. Conversely, Call & Join is computationally more efficient and often preferable for highly replicated datasets when the investigation of rare novel transcripts is not the primary objective. Our findings provide a conceptual and practical framework for multi-sample transcriptome reconstruction, guiding best practices in the context of increasingly large-scale lrRNA-seq studies.
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.