The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Artificial and natural duplicates in pyrosequencing reads of metagenomic data
Open accessAbstract
Background: Artificial duplicates from pyrosequencing reads may lead to incorrect interpretation of the abundance of species and genes in metagenomic studies. Duplicated reads were filtered out in many metagenomic projects. However, since the duplicated reads observed in a pyrosequencing run also include natural (non-artificial) duplicates, simply removing all duplicates may also cause underestimation of abundance associated with natural duplicates. Results: We implemented a method for identification of exact and nearly identical duplicates from pyrosequencing reads. This method performs an all-against-all sequence comparison and clusters the duplicates into groups using an algorithm modified from our previous sequence clustering method cd-hit. This method can process a typical dataset in ~10 minutes; it also provides a consensus sequence for each group of duplicates. We applied this method to the underlying raw reads of 39 genomic projects and 10 metagenomic projects that utilized pyrosequencing technique. We compared the occurrences of the duplicates identified by our method and the natural duplicates made by independent simulations. We observed that the duplicates, including both artificial and natural duplicates, make up 4-44% of reads. The number of natural duplicates highly correlates with the samples' read density (number of reads divided by genome size). For high-complexity metagenomic samples lacking dominant species, natural duplicates only make up <1% of all duplicates. But for some other samples like transcriptomic samples, majority of the observed duplicates might be natural duplicates. Conclusions: Our method is available from http://cd-hit.org as a downloadable program and a web server. It is important not only to identify the duplicates from metagenomic datasets but also to distinguish whether they are artificial or natural duplicates. We provide a tool to estimate the number of natural duplicates according to user-defined sample types, so users can decide whether to retain or remove duplicates in their projects.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Environmental genome shotgun sequencing of the sargasso sea
Venter, J. C., Remington, K., Heidelberg, J. F., Halpern, A. L., Rusch, D., Eisen, J. A., Wu, D., Paulsen, I., Nelson, K. E., Nelson, W., et al. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1093857 · Cited by 4,376
Community structure and metabolism through reconstruction of microbial genomes from the environment
Tyson, G. W., Chapman, J., Hugenholtz, P., Allen, E. E., Ram, R. J., Richardson, P. M., Solovyev, V. V., Rubin, E. M., Rokhsar, D. S., & Banfield, J. F. (2004) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature02340 · Cited by 2,417
Functional metagenomic profiling of nine biomes
Dinsdale, E. A., Edwards, R. A., Hall, D., Angly, F., Breitbart, M., Brulc, J. M., Furlan, M., Desnues, C., Haynes, M., Li, L., et al. (2008) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature06810 · Cited by 980
Cited by
Cd-hit: Accelerated for clustering the next-generation sequencing data
Fu, L., Niu, B., Zhu, Z., Wu, S., & Li, W. (2012) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/bts565 · Cited by 11,175
Self-citationShining a Light on Dark Sequencing: Characterising Errors in Ion Torrent PGM Data
Bragg, L. M., Stone, G., Butler, M. K., Hugenholtz, P., & Tyson, G. W. (2013) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003031 · Cited by 261
Analysis of High-Throughput Ancient DNA Sequencing Data
Kircher, M. (2012) · Methods in Molecular Biology · doi:10.1007/978-1-61779-516-9_23 · Cited by 236
Aylagas, E., Borja, Á., & Rodríguez-Ezpeleta, N. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0090529 · Cited by 182
Vincent, C., Miller, M. A., Edens, T. J., Mehrotra, S., Dewar, K., & Manges, A. R. (2016) · Microbiome · doi:10.1186/s40168-016-0156-3 · Cited by 124
The active human gut microbiota differs from the total microbiota
Peris-Bondia, F., Latorre, A., Artacho, A., Moya, A., & D'Auria, G. (2011) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0022448 · Cited by 113
Zheng, L., Crippen, T. L., Holmes, L., Singh, B., Pimsler, M. L., Benbow, M. E., Tarone, A. M., Dowd, S., Yu, Z., Vanlaerhoven, S. L., et al. (2013) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep02563 · Cited by 110
Metadata
- Authors
- Niu, B., Fu, L., Sun, S., & Li, W.
- Venue
- BMC Bioinformatics
- Published
- 2010-04-13
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 187-187
- ISSN
- 1471-2105 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2108166985
- Cited by
- 273
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 13.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.