Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
One is not enough: On the effects of reference genome for the mapping and subsequent analyses of short-reads
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
One is not enough: On the effects of reference genome for the mapping and subsequent analyses of short-reads
Do you wish to request the book?
One is not enough: On the effects of reference genome for the mapping and subsequent analyses of short-reads
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
One is not enough: On the effects of reference genome for the mapping and subsequent analyses of short-reads
2021
Overview
Mapping of high-throughput sequencing (HTS) reads to a single arbitrary reference genome is a frequently used approach in microbial genomics. However, the choice of a reference may represent a source of errors that may affect subsequent analyses such as the detection of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and phylogenetic inference. In this work, we evaluated the effect of reference choice on short-read sequence data from five clinically and epidemiologically relevant bacteria ( Klebsiella pneumoniae , Legionella pneumophila , Neisseria gonorrhoeae , Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Serratia marcescens ). Publicly available whole-genome assemblies encompassing the genomic diversity of these species were selected as reference sequences, and read alignment statistics, SNP calling, recombination rates, d N /d S ratios, and phylogenetic trees were evaluated depending on the mapping reference. The choice of different reference genomes proved to have an impact on almost all the parameters considered in the five species. In addition, these biases had potential epidemiological implications such as including/excluding isolates of particular clades and the estimation of genetic distances. These findings suggest that the single reference approach might introduce systematic errors during mapping that affect subsequent analyses, particularly for data sets with isolates from genetically diverse backgrounds. In any case, exploring the effects of different references on the final conclusions is highly recommended.
Publisher
Public Library of Science,Public Library of Science (PLoS)
