Search for: All records

RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) has become an exemplary technology in modern biology and clinical science. Its immense popularity is due in large part to the continuous efforts of the bioinformatics community to develop accurate and scalable computational tools to analyze the enormous amounts of transcriptomic data that it produces. RNA-seq analysis enables genes and their corresponding transcripts to be probed for a variety of purposes, such as detecting novel exons or whole transcripts, assessing expression of genes and alternative transcripts, and studying alternative splicing structure. It can be a challenge, however, to obtain meaningful biological signals from raw RNA-seq data because of the enormous scale of the data as well as the inherent limitations of different sequencing technologies, such as amplification bias or biases of library preparation . The need to overcome these technical challenges has pushed the rapid development of novel computational tools, which have evolved and diversified in accordance with technological advancements, leading to the current myriad of RNA-seq tools. These tools, combined with the diverse computational skill sets of biomedical researchers, help to unlock the full potential of RNA-seq. The purpose of this review is to explain basic concepts in the computational analysis of RNA-seq data and define discipline-specific jargon. 

Advances in whole-genome sequencing (WGS) promise to enable the accurate and comprehensive structural variant (SV) discovery. Dissecting SVs from WGS data presents a substantial number of challenges and a plethora of SV detection methods have been developed. Currently, evidence that investigators can use to select appropriate SV detection tools is lacking. In this article, we have evaluated the performance of SV detection tools on mouse and human WGS data using a comprehensive polymerase chain reaction-confirmed gold standard set of SVs and the genome-in-a-bottle variant set, respectively. In contrast to the previous benchmarking studies, our gold standard dataset included a complete set of SVs allowing us to report both precision and sensitivity rates of the SV detection methods. Our study investigates the ability of the methods to detect deletions, thus providing an optimistic estimate of SV detection performance as the SV detection methods that fail to detect deletions are likely to miss more complex SVs. We found that SV detection tools varied widely in their performance, with several methods providing a good balance between sensitivity and precision. Additionally, we have determined the SV callers best suited for low- and ultralow-pass sequencing data as well as for different deletion length categories.