Scientific ReportsBioinformaticsPeer-reviewed journal article
Effect of de novo transcriptome assembly on transcript quantification
Abstract
BackgroundCorrect quantification of transcript expression is essential to understand the functional products of the genome in different physiological conditions and developmental stages. Recently, the development of high-throughput RNA sequencing (RNA-Seq) allows the researchers to perform transcriptome analysis for the organisms without the reference genome and transcriptome. For such projects, de novo transcriptome assembly must be carried out prior to quantification. However, a large number of erroneous contigs produced by the assemblers might result in unreliable estimation on the abundance of transcripts. In this regard, this study comprehensively investigates how assembly quality affects the performance of quantification for RNA-Seq analysis based on de novo transcriptome assembly.\n\nResultsSeveral important factors that might seriously affect the accuracy of the RNA-Seq analysis were thoroughly discussed. First, we found that the assemblers perform comparatively well for the transcriptomes with lower biological complexity. Second, we examined the over-extended and incomplete contigs, and then demonstrated that assembly completeness has a strong impact on the estimation of contig abundance. Lastly, we investigated the behavior of the quantifiers with respect to sequence ambiguity which might be originally present in the transcriptome or accidentally produced by assemblers. The results suggest that the quantifiers often over-estimate the expression of family-collapse contigs and under-estimate the expression of duplicated contigs. For organisms without reference transcriptome, it remained challenging to detect the inaccurate abundance estimation on family-collapse contigs. On the contrary, we observed that the situation of under-estimation on duplicated contigs can be warned through analyzing the read distribution of the duplicated contigs.\n\nConclusionsIn summary, we explicated the behavior of quantifiers when erroneous contigs are present and we outlined the potential problems that the assemblers might cause for the downstream analysis of RNA-Seq. We anticipate the analytic results conducted in this study provides valuable insights for future development of transcriptome assembly and quantification.\n\nAvailabilitywe proposed an open-source Python based package QuantEval that builds connected components for the assembled contigs based on sequence similarity and evaluates the quantification results for each connected component. The package can be downloaded from https://github.com/dn070017/QuantEval.
- assay: bulk RNA-seq
- research focus: benchmarking
- research focus: software / tool
- research focus: differential expression
- research focus: gene regulatory network inference
- approach: statistical model
- Citations
- 54
- FWCI
- 2.32
- Field percentile
- top 10%
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
- TransRate: reference free quality assessment of de-novo transcriptome assemblies
Richard D Smith-Unna, Chris Boursnell, … Steven Kelly·bioRxiv·Jun 27, 2015
- Comprehensive Transcriptome Quality Assessment Using CATS: Reference-free and Reference-based Approaches
Kristian Bodulić, Kristian Vlahoviček·Nature CommunicationsPeer-reviewed·Apr 20, 2026
- The evaluation of RNA-Seq de novo assembly by PacBio long read sequencing
Yifan Yang, Michael Gribskov·bioRxiv·Aug 15, 2019
- A consensus-based ensemble approach to improve transcriptome assembly
Adam Voshall, Sairam Behera, … Etsuko N. Moriyama·BMC BioinformaticsPeer-reviewed·Oct 21, 2021
- Evaluation of de novo transcriptome assemblies from RNA-Seq data
Bo Li, Nathanael Fillmore, … Colin Dewey·bioRxiv·Jun 13, 2014
- Error, noise and bias in de novo transcriptome assemblies
Adam H. Freedman, Michele E. Clamp, Timothy B. Sackton·Molecular Ecology ResourcesPeer-reviewed·Mar 17, 2020