Cited by 2,530Genomics and Phylogenetic StudiesSingle-cell and spatial transcriptomicsGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities

Opportunities and challenges in long-read sequencing data analysis

Open access
Amarasinghe, Shanika L., Su, Shian, Dong, Xueyi, Zappia, Luke, Ritchie, Matthew E., Gouil, Quentin·2020·Genome Biology

Abstract

Long-read technologies are overcoming early limitations in accuracy and throughput, broadening their application domains in genomics. Dedicated analysis tools that take into account the characteristics of long-read data are thus required, but the fast pace of development of such tools can be overwhelming. To assist in the design and analysis of long-read sequencing projects, we review the current landscape of available tools and present an online interactive database, long-read-tools.org, to facilitate their browsing. We further focus on the principles of error correction, base modification detection, and long-read transcriptomics analysis and highlight the challenges that remain.

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 · 10.1186/s13059-020-1935-5

Cites

168 of 168 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?

  • Conventional single-cell transcriptomics assays capture information at the gene level, thereby missing much of the biological diversity and regulatory mechanisms that occur at the isoform level.

    “Conventional single-cell transcriptomics assays capture information at the gene level, thereby missing much of the biological diversity and regulatory mechanisms that occurs at the isoform level.30”

    From hdWGCNA identifies co-expression networks in high-dimensional transcriptomics data (2023) · cites this paper as [30]

    In “Analysing long-read transcriptomes” (page unavailable), the paper says fragmented short reads cannot fully assemble or accurately quantify expressed isoforms and describes alternative splicing as a major source of gene-expression complexity. It does not specifically say that conventional single-cell assays capture only gene-level information or establish the claimed loss of isoform-level regulatory information in those assays. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • It is still challenging to distinguish true biological diversity from technical differences and preserve important biological variations despite batch-effect correction methods.

    “Although there exist batch-effect correction methods, it's still challenging to distinguish true biological diversity from technical differences and thus preserve important biological variations 13 .”

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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [56]Oxford Nanopore Technologies. Clive Brown’s keynote at Nanopore Community Meeting 2018. 2018. https://nanoporetech.com/resource-centre/clive-brown-ncm-2018. Accessed 6 June 2019.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Amarasinghe, S. L., Su, S., Dong, X., Zappia, L., Ritchie, M. E., & Gouil, Q.
Affiliations
The University of Melbourne (AU)
Corresponding author
Gouil, Quentin
Venue
Genome Biology
Published
2020-02-07
Volume
21
Issue
1
Pages
30-30
ISSN
  • 1465-6906 (ISSN-L)
  • 1474-760X
OpenAlex
W3007172120
Cited by
2,530
References
167
Citations by year
2026: 253 · 2025: 439 · 2024: 498 · 2023: 437 · 2022: 441 · 2021: 356 · 2020: 100 · 2019: 5 · 2012: 1
FWCI
32.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Genome biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • 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
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
Keywords
long-read sequencing, error correction, sequencing accuracy, sequencing throughput
MeSH terms
Whole Genome Sequencing, Data Science, Nanopore Sequencing, Animals, Humans, Genomics

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