Cited by 25DNA and Biological ComputingAdvanced Data Storage TechnologiesAlgorithms and Data Compression

A Characterization of the DNA Data Storage Channel

Open access
Heckel, Reinhard, Mikutis, Gediminas, Grass, Robert N.·2019·Scientific Reports

Abstract

Owing to its longevity and enormous information density, DNA, the molecule encoding biological information, has emerged as a promising archival storage medium. However, due to technological constraints, data can only be written onto many short DNA molecules that are stored in an unordered way, and can only be read by sampling from this DNA pool. Moreover, imperfections in writing (synthesis), reading (sequencing), storage, and handling of the DNA, in particular amplification via PCR, lead to a loss of DNA molecules and induce errors within the molecules. In order to design DNA storage systems, a qualitative and quantitative understanding of the errors and the loss of molecules is crucial. In this paper, we characterize those error probabilities by analyzing data from our own experiments as well as from experiments of two different groups. We find that errors within molecules are mainly due to synthesis and sequencing, while imperfections in handling and storage lead to a significant loss of sequences. The aim of our study is to help guide the design of future DNA data storage systems by providing a quantitative and qualitative understanding of the DNA data storage channel.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41598-019-45832-6

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • De novo synthesis of long sequences of DNA remains challenging, so sequences must be broken into smaller fragments of ∼200 bases, requiring massive numbers of unique DNA sequences.

    “Because the de novo synthesis of long sequences of DNA remains challenging,20 these sequences must be broken into smaller fragments (∼200 bases), which requires massive numbers of unique DNA sequences to be made.”
  • It is likely unpractical to scale random access by PCR-based addressing indefinitely because of the difficulty of orthogonal primer design and the requirement for many amplification cycles given PCR bias.

    “While this does not appear to be a hard limit,6 it is likely unpractical to scale random access by PCR-based addressing indefinitely because of the aforementioned difficulty of orthogonal primer design and the requirement for many amplification cycles given the associated impact of PCR bias.20”
  • Synthesis dominantly causes deletions at a final rate of around 0.2-1% per nucleotide.

    “synthesis dominantly causes deletions (e.g., missing a base) at a final rate of around 0.2–1% per nt.”
  • Amplification and SBS-based platforms mainly introduce substitution errors.

    “While amplification and SBS-based platforms mainly introduce substitution errors (reading a C instead of a G, for example),”
  • Insertions are uncommon and usually occur at less than 0.1% per nucleotide, mainly because of synthesis.

    “Insertions (addition of extra bases) are uncommon and usually occur at less than 0.1% per nt, mainly because of synthesis.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Heckel, R., Mikutis, G., & Grass, R. N.
Affiliations
  • Rice University (US)
  • ETH Zurich (CH)
Corresponding author
Heckel, Reinhard
Venue
Scientific Reports
Published
2019-07-04
Volume
9
Issue
1
Pages
9663-9663
ISSN
2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2791679619
Cited by
9
References
41
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3
FWCI
0.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • mediaTUM (Technical University of Munich) (submittedVersion)
  • Repository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • ETH Zürich Research Collection (cc-by)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › DNA and Biological Computing
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Advanced Data Storage Technologies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Algorithms and Data Compression
Keywords
DNA data storage, error probability, sequencing errors, archival storage, information density
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Diagnostic Tests, Routine, DNA, Humans, Research Design, Specimen Handling, Information Storage and Retrieval, Sequence Analysis, DNA, High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review