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...
Main Authors: | , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |