Magic-BLAST incorporates within the NCBI BLAST code framework ideas developed in the NCBI Magic pipeline, in particular hit extensions by local walk and jump (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26109056), and recursive clipping of mismatches near the edges of the reads, which avoids accumulating artefactual mismatches near splice sites and is needed to distinguish short indels from substitutions near the edges.

Address of the bookmark: https://ncbi.github.io/magicblast/

Ref https://www.lncrnablog.com/lncpipe-a-nextflow-based-pipeline-for-identification-and-analysis-of-long-non-coding-rnas-from-rna-seq-data/

Address of the bookmark: https://github.com/likelet/LncPipe

Address of the bookmark: https://ccb.jhu.edu/software/stringtie/

Why Normalize RNA-Seq Data?

Normalization is a crucial step in RNA-Seq analysis for the following reasons:

• Sequencing depth: Different RNA-Seq experiments produce varying numbers of reads, making direct comparisons between samples misleading.

• Gene length: Longer genes inherently generate more reads, irrespective of their actual expression level.

• Bias reduction: Normalization mitigates technical biases, enabling meaningful biological interpretation.

TPM (Transcripts Per Million)

TPM measures the proportion of reads mapped to a transcript, normalized by transcript length and sequencing depth. It is calculated as:

Key Features:

1. Proportionality: TPM values sum to 1,000,000 across all transcripts in a sample, making it easier to compare between samples.

2. Intuitive interpretation: TPM values directly represent the abundance of transcripts in a sample.

3. Preferred for comparisons: TPM facilitates between-sample comparisons better than FPKM.

FPKM (Fragments Per Kilobase Million)

FPKM normalizes read counts by transcript length and sequencing depth, but without enforcing proportionality like TPM. It is defined as:

Key Features:

1. Historical significance: FPKM was one of the first normalization methods used for RNA-Seq.

2. Single-end vs. paired-end: In paired-end sequencing, FPKM becomes RPKM (Reads Per Kilobase Million).

3. Limited utility: FPKM values are not as robust as TPM for cross-sample comparisons due to lack of proportionality.

CPM (Counts Per Million)

CPM normalizes raw read counts by sequencing depth, without considering gene length. It is expressed as:

Key Features:

1. Simplicity: CPM is straightforward and computationally less intensive.

2. Application: Suitable for non-length-dependent analyses, such as comparing total expression levels or differential expression analysis.

3. Gene length agnostic: CPM does not correct for gene length, making it less ideal for measuring expression levels.

When to Use Each Method

• TPM: Best for comparing expression levels between samples, especially when transcript length and sequencing depth vary.

• FPKM: Useful for historical consistency but generally replaced by TPM.

• CPM: Ideal for differential expression analysis when gene length normalization is unnecessary.

Conclusion

Choosing the right normalization method depends on the specific objectives of your RNA-Seq analysis. TPM’s proportionality and robustness make it the preferred choice for most applications, while CPM serves well for differential expression studies. Although FPKM paved the way for RNA-Seq normalization, it has largely been supplanted by TPM in modern workflows. Understanding these methods and their nuances ensures accurate and meaningful interpretations of RNA-Seq data.

References:

1. Li, B., & Dewey, C. N. (2011). RSEM: accurate transcript quantification from RNA-Seq data with or without a reference genome. BMC Bioinformatics.

2. Trapnell, C., et al. (2010). Transcript assembly and quantification by RNA-Seq reveals unannotated transcripts and isoform switching during cell differentiation. Nature Biotechnology.

3. Law, C. W., et al. (2014). voom: precision weights unlock linear model analysis tools for RNA-seq read counts. Genome Biology.

Address of the bookmark: https://bioconductor.org/packages/3.7/bioc/vignettes/dupRadar/inst/doc/dupRadar.html

Speaker: Dr. Satish Sankaran, Vice President and Lab Director - Clinical Operations & Clinical Lab, Strand Life Sciences Pvt Ltd

Abstract: Next Generation sequencing has come a long way in aiding genetic disease diagnosis by bringing down both the time and cost of testing. Testing involves massively parallel sequencing of a single to 100s of genes in a one assay. With a large amount of sequence data getting generated from such assays, it is critical that the data is analyzed using standard analysis tools to detect wide range of variants. Strand Life Sciences, has tested more than 3000 clinical samples using multi-gene panels for diagnosis of rare disease conditions. NGS data analysis is done using the Strand NGS software and variant prioritization and reporting using StrandOMICS.

While most analysis software can easily detect single nucleotide variants, the complex ones involving insertions and deletions are usually missed. With multiple iterations the Strand NGS software is trained to effectively detect structural and copy number changes from a single NGS data set. This is critical in certain disease conditions like Retinoblastoma and Duchenne’s Muscular Dystrophy where there are clinically relevant deletions reported.

In this presentation, we present four different case studies where we were able to detect mutations due to unusual and difficult regions in the genome from the NGS data. These results were further confirmed using orthologous methods.

Session 1: 31 Jan 2018; 9:00 AM CET
Session 2: 31 Jan 2018; 8:00 AM PST

Register at http://www.strand-ngs.com/webinar_registration

First cover a full workflow from preparation, reads counting, data preprocessing, gene set test, to pathway visualization in about 40 lines of codes. The same workflow can be used for GO analysis or other types of gene set analysis too. We also describe joint workflows, i.e. to do gene-level analysis using one of the major RNA-Seq analysis tools, DEseq/DEseq2, edgeR, limma and Cufflinks, and feed the results into GAGE/Pahview for pathway analysis or visualization. All these workflows are implemented in R/Bioconductor.

The work ows cover the most common situations and issues for RNA-Seq data pathway analysis. Issues like data quality assessment are relevant for data analysis in general yet out the scope of this tutorial. Although we focus on RNA-Seq data here, but pathway analysis work ow remains similar for microarray, particularly step 3-4 would be the same. Please check gage and pathview vigenttes for details.

Note: You need to update to current release versions of R(3.0.2)/ Bioconductor(2.13) to use all the features. 

Reference: 

Please check it out:
http://bioconductor.org/packages/release/bioc/html/gage.html
http://bioconductor.org/packages/release/bioc/vignettes/gage/inst/doc/RNA-seqWorkflow.pdf

Scallop paper has been published at Nature Biotechnology. The datasets and scripts used in this paper to compare the performance of Scallop and other assemblers are available at scalloptest.

Please also checkout the podcast about Scallop (thanks Roman Cheplyaka for the interview). It is available at both the bioinformatics chat and iTunes.

https://github.com/Kingsford-Group/scallop

Address of the bookmark: https://github.com/Kingsford-Group/scallop