Deriving Ranges of Optimal Estimated Transcript Expression Due to Non-identifiability
Abstract
Current expression quantification methods suffer from a fundamental but under-characterized type of error: the most likely estimates for transcript abundances are not unique. This means multiple estimates of transcript abundances generate the observed RNA-seq reads with equal likelihood, and the underlying true expression cannot be determined. This problem is called non-identifiability for probabilistic models, and is further exacerbated by incomplete reference transcriptome. That is, reads may be sequenced from unannotated expressed transcripts. Graph quantification is a generalization to transcript quantification, accounting for the reference incompleteness by allowing exponentially many unannotated transcripts to express reads. We propose methods to calculate a "confidence range of expression" for each transcript, representing its possible abundance across equally optimal estimates for both quantification models. This range informs both whether a transcript has potential estimation error due to non-identifiability and the extent of the error. Applying our methods to the Human Body Map data, we observe 35%-50% of transcripts potentially suffer from inaccurate quantification caused by non-identifiability. When comparing the expression between isoforms in one sample, we find that the degree of inaccuracy of 20%-47% transcripts can be so large that the ranking of expression between the transcript and its sibling isoforms cannot be determined. When comparing the expression of a transcript between two groups of RNA-seq samples in differential expression analysis, we observe that the majority of detected differentially expressed transcripts are reliable with a few exceptions after considering the ranges of the optimal expression estimates. The code for computing the range of expression is available at https://github.com/Kingsford-Group/subgraphquant. The code for the involved analyses is available at https://github.com/Kingsford-Group/subgraphquantanalysis.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 6
- Organism
- Assay
- Research Focus
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Detecting anomalies in RNA-seq quantification
Cong Ma, Carl Kingsford·Cell SystemsPeer-reviewed·Nov 27, 2019
- Dividing out quantification uncertainty allows efficient assessment of differential transcript expression with edgeR
Pedro L. Baldoni, Yunshun Chen, … Gordon K. Smyth·Nucleic Acids ResearchPeer-reviewed·Nov 21, 2023
- Effect of de novo transcriptome assembly on transcript quantification
Ping‐Han Hsieh, Yen‐Jen Oyang, Chien‐Yu Chen·Scientific ReportsPeer-reviewed·Jun 5, 2019
- Modeling of RNA-seq fragment sequence bias reduces systematic errors in transcript abundance estimation
Michael I Love, John B Hogenesch, Rafael A Irizarry·bioRxiv·Aug 29, 2015
- Accounting for fragments of unexpectedorigin improves transcript quantification inRNA-seq simulations focused on increased realism
Avi Srivastava, Mohsen Zakeri, … Rob Patro·bioRxiv·Jan 17, 2021
- Refining RNA-Seq Transcriptome Profiles with Transcript-Specific Minimal-Shared Regions
Qiang Su·bioRxiv·Nov 2, 2026