Comparison of sequencing platforms for single nucleotide variant calls in a human sample.

Next-generation sequencings platforms coupled with advanced bioinformatic tools enable re-sequencing of the human genome at high-speed and large cost savings. We compare sequencing platforms from Roche/454(GS FLX), Illumina/HiSeq (HiSeq 2000), and Life Technologies/SOLiD (SOLiD 3 ECC) for their abil...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Aakrosh Ratan, Webb Miller, Joseph Guillory, Jeremy Stinson, Somasekar Seshagiri, Stephan C Schuster
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2013-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3566181?pdf=render
id doaj-ec4995a85a46472ab77299c5f4b843e9
record_format Article
spelling doaj-ec4995a85a46472ab77299c5f4b843e92020-11-24T21:17:52ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032013-01-0182e5508910.1371/journal.pone.0055089Comparison of sequencing platforms for single nucleotide variant calls in a human sample.Aakrosh RatanWebb MillerJoseph GuilloryJeremy StinsonSomasekar SeshagiriStephan C SchusterNext-generation sequencings platforms coupled with advanced bioinformatic tools enable re-sequencing of the human genome at high-speed and large cost savings. We compare sequencing platforms from Roche/454(GS FLX), Illumina/HiSeq (HiSeq 2000), and Life Technologies/SOLiD (SOLiD 3 ECC) for their ability to identify single nucleotide substitutions in whole genome sequences from the same human sample. We report on significant GC-related bias observed in the data sequenced on Illumina and SOLiD platforms. The differences in the variant calls were investigated with regards to coverage, and sequencing error. Some of the variants called by only one or two of the platforms were experimentally tested using mass spectrometry; a method that is independent of DNA sequencing. We establish several causes why variants remained unreported, specific to each platform. We report the indel called using the three sequencing technologies and from the obtained results we conclude that sequencing human genomes with more than a single platform and multiple libraries is beneficial when high level of accuracy is required.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3566181?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Aakrosh Ratan
Webb Miller
Joseph Guillory
Jeremy Stinson
Somasekar Seshagiri
Stephan C Schuster
spellingShingle Aakrosh Ratan
Webb Miller
Joseph Guillory
Jeremy Stinson
Somasekar Seshagiri
Stephan C Schuster
Comparison of sequencing platforms for single nucleotide variant calls in a human sample.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Aakrosh Ratan
Webb Miller
Joseph Guillory
Jeremy Stinson
Somasekar Seshagiri
Stephan C Schuster
author_sort Aakrosh Ratan
title Comparison of sequencing platforms for single nucleotide variant calls in a human sample.
title_short Comparison of sequencing platforms for single nucleotide variant calls in a human sample.
title_full Comparison of sequencing platforms for single nucleotide variant calls in a human sample.
title_fullStr Comparison of sequencing platforms for single nucleotide variant calls in a human sample.
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of sequencing platforms for single nucleotide variant calls in a human sample.
title_sort comparison of sequencing platforms for single nucleotide variant calls in a human sample.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2013-01-01
description Next-generation sequencings platforms coupled with advanced bioinformatic tools enable re-sequencing of the human genome at high-speed and large cost savings. We compare sequencing platforms from Roche/454(GS FLX), Illumina/HiSeq (HiSeq 2000), and Life Technologies/SOLiD (SOLiD 3 ECC) for their ability to identify single nucleotide substitutions in whole genome sequences from the same human sample. We report on significant GC-related bias observed in the data sequenced on Illumina and SOLiD platforms. The differences in the variant calls were investigated with regards to coverage, and sequencing error. Some of the variants called by only one or two of the platforms were experimentally tested using mass spectrometry; a method that is independent of DNA sequencing. We establish several causes why variants remained unreported, specific to each platform. We report the indel called using the three sequencing technologies and from the obtained results we conclude that sequencing human genomes with more than a single platform and multiple libraries is beneficial when high level of accuracy is required.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3566181?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT aakroshratan comparisonofsequencingplatformsforsinglenucleotidevariantcallsinahumansample
AT webbmiller comparisonofsequencingplatformsforsinglenucleotidevariantcallsinahumansample
AT josephguillory comparisonofsequencingplatformsforsinglenucleotidevariantcallsinahumansample
AT jeremystinson comparisonofsequencingplatformsforsinglenucleotidevariantcallsinahumansample
AT somasekarseshagiri comparisonofsequencingplatformsforsinglenucleotidevariantcallsinahumansample
AT stephancschuster comparisonofsequencingplatformsforsinglenucleotidevariantcallsinahumansample
_version_ 1726011707344551936