More Like this

1. RelocaTE2: a high resolution transposable element insertion site mapping tool for population resequencing

   https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.2942  

   Chen, Jinfeng ; Wrightsman, Travis R. ; Wessler, Susan R. ; Stajich, Jason E. ( January 2017 , PeerJ)

   Background Transposable element (TE) polymorphisms are important components of population genetic variation. The functional impacts of TEs in gene regulation and generating genetic diversity have been observed in multiple species, but the frequency and magnitude of TE variation is under appreciated. Inexpensive and deep sequencing technology has made it affordable to apply population genetic methods to whole genomes with methods that identify single nucleotide and insertion/deletion polymorphisms. However, identifying TE polymorphisms, particularly transposition events or non-reference insertion sites can be challenging due to the repetitive nature of these sequences, which hamper both the sensitivity and specificity of analysis tools. Methods We have developed the tool RelocaTE2 for identification of TE insertion sites at high sensitivity and specificity. RelocaTE2 searches for known TE sequences in whole genome sequencing reads from second generation sequencing platforms such as Illumina. These sequence reads are used as seeds to pinpoint chromosome locations where TEs have transposed. RelocaTE2 detects target site duplication (TSD) of TE insertions allowing it to report TE polymorphism loci with single base pair precision. Results and Discussion The performance of RelocaTE2 is evaluated using both simulated and real sequence data. RelocaTE2 demonstrate high level of sensitivity and specificity, particularly when the sequence coverage is not shallow. In comparison to other tools tested, RelocaTE2 achieves the best balance between sensitivity and specificity. In particular, RelocaTE2 performs best in prediction of TSDs for TE insertions. Even in highly repetitive regions, such as those tested on rice chromosome 4, RelocaTE2 is able to report up to 95% of simulated TE insertions with less than 0.1% false positive rate using 10-fold genome coverage resequencing data. RelocaTE2 provides a robust solution to identify TE insertion sites and can be incorporated into analysis workflows in support of describing the complete genotype from light coverage genome sequencing. 

   more » « less
2. EDGE COVID-19: a web platform to generate submission-ready genomes from SARS-CoV-2 sequencing efforts

   https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btac176  

   Lo, Chien-Chi ; Shakya, Migun ; Connor, Ryan ; Davenport, Karen ; Flynn, Mark ; Gutiérrez, Adán Myers y. ; Hu, Bin ; Li, Po-E ; Jackson, Elais Player ; Xu, Yan ; et al ( March 2022 , Bioinformatics)

   Genomics has become an essential technology for surveilling emerging infectious disease outbreaks. A range of technologies and strategies for pathogen genome enrichment and sequencing are being used by laboratories worldwide, together with different and sometimes ad hoc, analytical procedures for generating genome sequences. A fully integrated analytical process for raw sequence to consensus genome determination, suited to outbreaks such as the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, is critical to provide a solid genomic basis for epidemiological analyses and well-informed decision making. We have developed a web-based platform and integrated bioinformatic workflows that help to provide consistent high-quality analysis of SARS-CoV-2 sequencing data generated with either the Illumina or Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT). Using an intuitive web-based interface, this workflow automates data quality control, SARS-CoV-2 reference-based genome variant and consensus calling, lineage determination and provides the ability to submit the consensus sequence and necessary metadata to GenBank, GISAID and INSDC raw data repositories. We tested workflow usability using real world data and validated the accuracy of variant and lineage analysis using several test datasets, and further performed detailed comparisons with results from the COVID-19 Galaxy Project workflow. Our analyses indicate that EC-19 workflows generate high-quality SARS-CoV-2 genomes. Finally, we share a perspective on patterns and impact observed with Illumina versus ONT technologies on workflow congruence and differences.

   https://edge-covid19.edgebioinformatics.org, and https://github.com/LANL-Bioinformatics/EDGE/tree/SARS-CoV2.

   Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

    

   more » « less
3. InMut-finder: a software tool for insertion identification in mutagenesis using Nanopore long reads

   https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-021-08206-9  

   Song, Rui ; Wang, Ziyao ; Wang, Hui ; Zhang, Han ; Wang, Xuemeng ; Nguyen, Hanh ; Holding, David ; Yu, Bin ; Clemente, Tom ; Jia, Shangang ; et al ( December 2021 , BMC Genomics)

   Abstract Background Biological mutagens (such as transposon) with sequences inserted, play a crucial role to link observed phenotype and genotype in reverse genetic studies. For this reason, accurate and efficient software tools for identifying insertion sites based on the analysis of sequencing reads are desired. Results We developed a bioinformatics tool, a Finder, to identify genome-wide Insertions in Mutagenesis (named as “InMut-Finder”), based on target sequences and flanking sequences from long reads, such as Oxford Nanopore Sequencing. InMut-Finder succeeded in identify > 100 insertion sites in Medicago truncatula and soybean mutants based on sequencing reads of whole-genome DNA or enriched insertion-site DNA fragments. Insertion sites discovered by InMut-Finder were validated by PCR experiments. Conclusion InMut-Finder is a comprehensive and powerful tool for automated insertion detection from Nanopore long reads. The simplicity, efficiency, and flexibility of InMut-Finder make it a valuable tool for functional genomics and forward and reverse genetics. InMut-Finder was implemented with Perl, R, and Shell scripts, which are independent of the OS. The source code and instructions can be accessed at https://github.com/jsg200830/InMut-Finder . 

   more » « less
4. The Temple University Digital Pathology Corpus: The Breast Tissue Subset

   https://doi.org/10.1109/SPMB52430.2021.9672275  

   Wevodau, Z. ; Doshna, B. ; Jhala, N. ; Akhtar, I. ; Obeid, I. ; Picone, J. ( December 2021 , Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium (SPMB))

   Obeid, I. (Ed.)

   The Neural Engineering Data Consortium (NEDC) is developing the Temple University Digital Pathology Corpus (TUDP), an open source database of high-resolution images from scanned pathology samples [1], as part of its National Science Foundation-funded Major Research Instrumentation grant titled “MRI: High Performance Digital Pathology Using Big Data and Machine Learning” [2]. The long-term goal of this project is to release one million images. We have currently scanned over 100,000 images and are in the process of annotating breast tissue data for our first official corpus release, v1.0.0. This release contains 3,505 annotated images of breast tissue including 74 patients with cancerous diagnoses (out of a total of 296 patients). In this poster, we will present an analysis of this corpus and discuss the challenges we have faced in efficiently producing high quality annotations of breast tissue. It is well known that state of the art algorithms in machine learning require vast amounts of data. Fields such as speech recognition [3], image recognition [4] and text processing [5] are able to deliver impressive performance with complex deep learning models because they have developed large corpora to support training of extremely high-dimensional models (e.g., billions of parameters). Other fields that do not have access to such data resources must rely on techniques in which existing models can be adapted to new datasets [6]. A preliminary version of this breast corpus release was tested in a pilot study using a baseline machine learning system, ResNet18 [7], that leverages several open-source Python tools. The pilot corpus was divided into three sets: train, development, and evaluation. Portions of these slides were manually annotated [1] using the nine labels in Table 1 [8] to identify five to ten examples of pathological features on each slide. Not every pathological feature is annotated, meaning excluded areas can include focuses particular to these labels that are not used for training. A summary of the number of patches within each label is given in Table 2. To maintain a balanced training set, 1,000 patches of each label were used to train the machine learning model. Throughout all sets, only annotated patches were involved in model development. The performance of this model in identifying all the patches in the evaluation set can be seen in the confusion matrix of classification accuracy in Table 3. The highest performing labels were background, 97% correct identification, and artifact, 76% correct identification. A correlation exists between labels with more than 6,000 development patches and accurate performance on the evaluation set. Additionally, these results indicated a need to further refine the annotation of invasive ductal carcinoma (“indc”), inflammation (“infl”), nonneoplastic features (“nneo”), normal (“norm”) and suspicious (“susp”). This pilot experiment motivated changes to the corpus that will be discussed in detail in this poster presentation. To increase the accuracy of the machine learning model, we modified how we addressed underperforming labels. One common source of error arose with how non-background labels were converted into patches. Large areas of background within other labels were isolated within a patch resulting in connective tissue misrepresenting a non-background label. In response, the annotation overlay margins were revised to exclude benign connective tissue in non-background labels. Corresponding patient reports and supporting immunohistochemical stains further guided annotation reviews. The microscopic diagnoses given by the primary pathologist in these reports detail the pathological findings within each tissue site, but not within each specific slide. The microscopic diagnoses informed revisions specifically targeting annotated regions classified as cancerous, ensuring that the labels “indc” and “dcis” were used only in situations where a micropathologist diagnosed it as such. Further differentiation of cancerous and precancerous labels, as well as the location of their focus on a slide, could be accomplished with supplemental immunohistochemically (IHC) stained slides. When distinguishing whether a focus is a nonneoplastic feature versus a cancerous growth, pathologists employ antigen targeting stains to the tissue in question to confirm the diagnosis. For example, a nonneoplastic feature of usual ductal hyperplasia will display diffuse staining for cytokeratin 5 (CK5) and no diffuse staining for estrogen receptor (ER), while a cancerous growth of ductal carcinoma in situ will have negative or focally positive staining for CK5 and diffuse staining for ER [9]. Many tissue samples contain cancerous and non-cancerous features with morphological overlaps that cause variability between annotators. The informative fields IHC slides provide could play an integral role in machine model pathology diagnostics. Following the revisions made on all the annotations, a second experiment was run using ResNet18. Compared to the pilot study, an increase of model prediction accuracy was seen for the labels indc, infl, nneo, norm, and null. This increase is correlated with an increase in annotated area and annotation accuracy. Model performance in identifying the suspicious label decreased by 25% due to the decrease of 57% in the total annotated area described by this label. A summary of the model performance is given in Table 4, which shows the new prediction accuracy and the absolute change in error rate compared to Table 3. The breast tissue subset we are developing includes 3,505 annotated breast pathology slides from 296 patients. The average size of a scanned SVS file is 363 MB. The annotations are stored in an XML format. A CSV version of the annotation file is also available which provides a flat, or simple, annotation that is easy for machine learning researchers to access and interface to their systems. Each patient is identified by an anonymized medical reference number. Within each patient’s directory, one or more sessions are identified, also anonymized to the first of the month in which the sample was taken. These sessions are broken into groupings of tissue taken on that date (in this case, breast tissue). A deidentified patient report stored as a flat text file is also available. Within these slides there are a total of 16,971 total annotated regions with an average of 4.84 annotations per slide. Among those annotations, 8,035 are non-cancerous (normal, background, null, and artifact,) 6,222 are carcinogenic signs (inflammation, nonneoplastic and suspicious,) and 2,714 are cancerous labels (ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive ductal carcinoma in situ.) The individual patients are split up into three sets: train, development, and evaluation. Of the 74 cancerous patients, 20 were allotted for both the development and evaluation sets, while the remain 34 were allotted for train. The remaining 222 patients were split up to preserve the overall distribution of labels within the corpus. This was done in hope of creating control sets for comparable studies. Overall, the development and evaluation sets each have 80 patients, while the training set has 136 patients. In a related component of this project, slides from the Fox Chase Cancer Center (FCCC) Biosample Repository (https://www.foxchase.org/research/facilities/genetic-research-facilities/biosample-repository -facility) are being digitized in addition to slides provided by Temple University Hospital. This data includes 18 different types of tissue including approximately 38.5% urinary tissue and 16.5% gynecological tissue. These slides and the metadata provided with them are already anonymized and include diagnoses in a spreadsheet with sample and patient ID. We plan to release over 13,000 unannotated slides from the FCCC Corpus simultaneously with v1.0.0 of TUDP. Details of this release will also be discussed in this poster. Few digitally annotated databases of pathology samples like TUDP exist due to the extensive data collection and processing required. The breast corpus subset should be released by November 2021. By December 2021 we should also release the unannotated FCCC data. We are currently annotating urinary tract data as well. We expect to release about 5,600 processed TUH slides in this subset. We have an additional 53,000 unprocessed TUH slides digitized. Corpora of this size will stimulate the development of a new generation of deep learning technology. In clinical settings where resources are limited, an assistive diagnoses model could support pathologists’ workload and even help prioritize suspected cancerous cases. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This material is supported by the National Science Foundation under grants nos. CNS-1726188 and 1925494. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. REFERENCES [1] N. Shawki et al., “The Temple University Digital Pathology Corpus,” in Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology: Emerging Trends in Research and Applications, 1st ed., I. Obeid, I. Selesnick, and J. Picone, Eds. New York City, New York, USA: Springer, 2020, pp. 67 104. https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783030368432. [2] J. Picone, T. Farkas, I. Obeid, and Y. Persidsky, “MRI: High Performance Digital Pathology Using Big Data and Machine Learning.” Major Research Instrumentation (MRI), Division of Computer and Network Systems, Award No. 1726188, January 1, 2018 – December 31, 2021. https://www. isip.piconepress.com/projects/nsf_dpath/. [3] A. Gulati et al., “Conformer: Convolution-augmented Transformer for Speech Recognition,” in Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association (INTERSPEECH), 2020, pp. 5036-5040. https://doi.org/10.21437/interspeech.2020-3015. [4] C.-J. Wu et al., “Machine Learning at Facebook: Understanding Inference at the Edge,” in Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on High Performance Computer Architecture (HPCA), 2019, pp. 331–344. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8675201. [5] I. Caswell and B. Liang, “Recent Advances in Google Translate,” Google AI Blog: The latest from Google Research, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://ai.googleblog.com/2020/06/recent-advances-in-google-translate.html. [Accessed: 01-Aug-2021]. [6] V. Khalkhali, N. Shawki, V. Shah, M. Golmohammadi, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Low Latency Real-Time Seizure Detection Using Transfer Deep Learning,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium (SPMB), 2021, pp. 1 7. https://www.isip. piconepress.com/publications/conference_proceedings/2021/ieee_spmb/eeg_transfer_learning/. [7] J. Picone, T. Farkas, I. Obeid, and Y. Persidsky, “MRI: High Performance Digital Pathology Using Big Data and Machine Learning,” Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, 2020. https://www.isip.piconepress.com/publications/reports/2020/nsf/mri_dpath/. [8] I. Hunt, S. Husain, J. Simons, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Recent Advances in the Temple University Digital Pathology Corpus,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium (SPMB), 2019, pp. 1–4. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9037859. [9] A. P. Martinez, C. Cohen, K. Z. Hanley, and X. (Bill) Li, “Estrogen Receptor and Cytokeratin 5 Are Reliable Markers to Separate Usual Ductal Hyperplasia From Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia and Low-Grade Ductal Carcinoma In Situ,” Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med., vol. 140, no. 7, pp. 686–689, Apr. 2016. https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2015-0238-OA. 

   more » « less
5. BioKIT: a versatile toolkit for processing and analyzing diverse types of sequence data

   https://doi.org/10.1093/genetics/iyac079  

   Steenwyk, Jacob L ; Buida, Thomas J ; Gonçalves, Carla ; Goltz, Dayna C ; Morales, Grace ; Mead, Matthew E ; LaBella, Abigail L ; Chavez, Christina M ; Schmitz, Jonathan E ; Hadjifrangiskou, Maria ; et al ( May 2022 , Genetics)

   Stajich, J (Ed.)

   Abstract Bioinformatic analysis—such as genome assembly quality assessment, alignment summary statistics, relative synonymous codon usage, file format conversion, and processing and analysis—is integrated into diverse disciplines in the biological sciences. Several command-line pieces of software have been developed to conduct some of these individual analyses, but unified toolkits that conduct all these analyses are lacking. To address this gap, we introduce BioKIT, a versatile command line toolkit that has, upon publication, 42 functions, several of which were community-sourced, that conduct routine and novel processing and analysis of genome assemblies, multiple sequence alignments, coding sequences, sequencing data, and more. To demonstrate the utility of BioKIT, we conducted a comprehensive examination of relative synonymous codon usage across 171 fungal genomes that use alternative genetic codes, showed that the novel metric of gene-wise relative synonymous codon usage can accurately estimate gene-wise codon optimization, evaluated the quality and characteristics of 901 eukaryotic genome assemblies, and calculated alignment summary statistics for 10 phylogenomic data matrices. BioKIT will be helpful in facilitating and streamlining sequence analysis workflows. BioKIT is freely available under the MIT license from GitHub (https://github.com/JLSteenwyk/BioKIT), PyPi (https://pypi.org/project/jlsteenwyk-biokit/), and the Anaconda Cloud (https://anaconda.org/jlsteenwyk/jlsteenwyk-biokit). Documentation, user tutorials, and instructions for requesting new features are available online (https://jlsteenwyk.com/BioKIT). 

   more » « less