A comparison between solid 5500xl-and ion torrent pgm-derived mirna expression profiles in two breast cell lines

1Citations
Citations of this article
8Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Next-generation sequencing (NGS) platforms allow the analysis of hundreds of millions of molecules in a single sequencing run, revolutionizing many research areas. NGS-based microRNA studies enable expression quantification in unprecedented scale without the limitations of closed-platforms. Yet, whereas a massive amount of data produced by these platforms is available, comparisons of quantification/discovery capabilities between platforms are still lacking. Here we compare two NGS-platforms: SOLiD and PGM, by evaluating their microRNA identification/quantifica-tion capabilities using two breast-derived cell-lines. A high expression correlation (R2 > 0.9) was achieved, encompassing 97% of the miRNAs, and the few discrepancies in miRNA counts were attributable to molecules that have very low expression. Quantification divergences indicative of artefactual representation were seen for 14 miRNAs (higher in SOLiD-reads) and another 10 miRNAs more abundant in PGM-data. An inspection of these revealed an increased and statistically significant count of uracyls and uracyl-stretches for PGM-enriched miRNAs, compared to SOLiD and to the miRBase. In parallel, adenines and adenine-stretches were enriched for SOLiD-derived miRNA reads. We conclude that, whereas both platforms are overall consistent and can be used inter-changeably for microRNA expression studies, particular sequence features appear to be indicative of specific platform bias, and their presence in microRNAs should be considered for database-analyses.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Branco, G. P., Valieris, R., Povoa, L. V., de Araújo, L. F., Fernandes, G. R., de Souza, J. E. S., … Dias-Neto, E. (2020). A comparison between solid 5500xl-and ion torrent pgm-derived mirna expression profiles in two breast cell lines. Genetics and Molecular Biology, 43(2), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-4685-GMB-2018-0351

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free