Identification and correction of systematic error in high-throughput sequence data

Abstract

A feature common to all DNA sequencing technologies is the presence of base-call errors in the sequenced reads. The implications of such errors are application specific, ranging from minor informatics nuisances to major problems affecting biological inferences. Recently developed "next-gen" sequencing technologies have greatly reduced the cost of sequencing, but have been shown to be more error prone than previous technologies. Both position specific (depending on the location in the read) and sequence specific (depending on the sequence in the read) errors have been identified in Illumina and Life Technology sequencing platforms. We describe a new type of systematic error that manifests as statistically unlikely accumulations of errors at specific genome (or transcriptome) locations. We characterize and describe systematic errors using overlapping paired reads form high-coverage data. We show that such errors occur in approximately 1 in 1000 base pairs, and that quality scores at systematic error sites do not account for the extent of errors. We identify motifs that are frequent at systematic error sites, and describe a classifier that distinguishes heterozygous sites from systematic error. Our classifier is designed to accommodate data from experiments in which the allele frequencies at heterozygous sites are not necessarily 0.5 (such as in the case of RNA-Seq). Systematic errors can easily be mistaken for heterozygous sites in individuals, or for SNPs in population analyses. Systematic errors are particularly problematic in low coverage experiments, or in estimates of allele-specific expression from RNA-Seq data. Our characterization of systematic error has allowed us to develop a program, called SysCall, for identifying and correcting such errors. We conclude that correction of systematic errors is important to consider in the design and interpretation of high-throughput sequencing experiments.Availability: Software for correcting systematic errors is freely available from

Enabling xylose utilization in Yarrowia lipolytica for lipid production

“…Initial benchmarking growth assays were performed with strains and in contrast to previous reports [15,32,33], we found that Y. lipolytica strains PO1f and E26 were unable to grow in minimal media with xylose as the only carbon source. This result is consistent with additional reports in literature [34,35].…”

“…The HiSeq generated 25 337 178 read pairs that covered the Y. lipolytica genome approximately 225 times. The sequencing results were mapped to the CLIB122 genome using BWA; and Samtools, BEDTools and IGV were used to analyze the data [30][31][32][33].…”

Ultra-deep mutant spectrum profiling: improving sequencing accuracy using overlapping read pairs

“…Among the challenges of correctly separating the true mutations from sequencing related errors is the presence of the non-uniform error rates in the sequencing data [15,[20][21][22]. We have shown that even at Q30, ORP mismatch rates have a small but significant distribution ( Figure 2).…”

“…Their approach relied on an estimated error rate from the sequencer without the use of sequencing controls and included sequencing each sample twice to correct for sequencing error, which would present practical problems for sequencing larger numbers of samples collected from an outbreak. Moreover, recent work has indicated the presence of non-uniform error rates in Illumina sequence data in particular, and highlights the ongoing challenge of correctly separating the true mutant spectra from sequencing related errors [15,[22][23][24].…”

Oligotyping: differentiating between closely related microbial taxa using 16S rRNA gene data

“…; Meacham et al . ; Minoche, Dohm & Himmelbauer ; Quince et al . ; Benjamini & Speed ; Victoria et al .…”