Cited by 1,193RNA Research and SplicingGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesSingle-cell and spatial transcriptomics

MapSplice: Accurate mapping of RNA-seq reads for splice junction discovery

Open access
Wang, Kai, Singh, Darshan, Zeng, Zheng, Coleman, Stephen J., Huang, Yan, Savich, Gleb L., He, Xiaping, Mieczkowski, Piotr +6 more·2010·Nucleic Acids Research

Abstract

The accurate mapping of reads that span splice junctions is a critical component of all analytic techniques that work with RNA-seq data. We introduce a second generation splice detection algorithm, MapSplice, whose focus is high sensitivity and specificity in the detection of splices as well as CPU and memory efficiency. MapSplice can be applied to both short (<75 bp) and long reads (≥ 75 bp). MapSplice is not dependent on splice site features or intron length, consequently it can detect novel canonical as well as non-canonical splices. MapSplice leverages the quality and diversity of read alignments of a given splice to increase accuracy. We demonstrate that MapSplice achieves higher sensitivity and specificity than TopHat and SpliceMap on a set of simulated RNA-seq data. Experimental studies also support the accuracy of the algorithm. Splice junctions derived from eight breast cancer RNA-seq datasets recapitulated the extensiveness of alternative splicing on a global level as well as the differences between molecular subtypes of breast cancer. These combined results indicate that MapSplice is a highly accurate algorithm for the alignment of RNA-seq reads to splice junctions. Software download URL: http://www.netlab.uky.edu/p/bioinfo/MapSplice.

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 · 10.1093/nar/gkq622

Cites

37 of 37 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?

  • Several RNA-seq mappers are optimized for specific tasks: identifying SNPs or indels (GSNAP, PALMapper, MapSplice), detecting non-canonical splice junctions (STAR, MapSplice), ultra-fast mapping (GEM), or mapping long reads (STAR).

    “Several other mappers exist that are optimized to identify SNPs or indels (GSNAP [202], PALMapper [203] MapSplice [204]), detect non-canonical splice junctions (STAR [15], MapSplice [204]), achieve ultra-fast mapping (GEM [205]) or map long-reads (STAR [15]).”

    From A survey of best practices for RNA-seq data analysis (2016) · cites this paper as [204]

  • High inter-site false positive DEG rates were observed across multiple analysis pipelines (WHAM, Mapsplice, Novoalign, Cufflinks, HTSeq), independent of pipeline or alignment method.

    “When we examined the inter-site DEG false positive rates for several other analysis pipelines (WHAM34, Mapsplice35, Novoalign36, Cufflinks23, 37, 38 and HTSeq39) we found similarly high false positive rates, regardless of the analysis pipeline or read alignment methods used (Supplementary Fig. 1).”

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
Wang, K., Singh, D., Zeng, Z., Coleman, S. J., Huang, Y., Savich, G. L., He, X., Mieczkowski, P., Grimm, S. A., Perou, C. M., MacLeod, J. N., Chiang, D. Y., Prins, J. F., & Liu, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Kentucky (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Corresponding author
Liu, Jinze
Venue
Nucleic Acids Research
Published
2010-08-28
Volume
38
Issue
18
Pages
e178-e178
ISSN
  • 0305-1048 (ISSN-L)
  • 1362-4962
OpenAlex
W2126144698
Cited by
1,193
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 43 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 58 · 2021: 116 · 2020: 110 · 2019: 102 · 2018: 129 · 2017: 112 · 2016: 127 · 2015: 76 · 2014: 74 · 2013: 66 · 2012: 49
FWCI
20.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nucleic Acids Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UKnowledge (University of Kentucky) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Cancer Institute (CA143848, U24CA143848)
  • National Center for Research Resources (P20RR016481)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA Research and Splicing
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Single-cell and spatial transcriptomics
Keywords
RNA-seq read mapping, splice junction detection, alternative splicing, splice site detection, non-canonical splicing, long-read alignment, breast cancer, molecular subtypes, TopHat
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Breast Neoplasms, Female, Humans, Software, Alternative Splicing, Sequence Analysis, RNA, Gene Expression Profiling, RNA Splice Sites

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