4.7 Article

Effects of RNA integrity on transcript quantification by total RNA sequencing of clinically collected human placental samples

Journal

FASEB JOURNAL
Volume 31, Issue 8, Pages 3298-3308

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1096/fj.201601031RR

Keywords

RNA-Seq; RNA degradation; RIN; gene expression

Funding

  1. European Union
  2. European Regional Development Fund [3.2.0701.12-0047]
  3. Estonian Research Council [IUT34-12, ETF9030]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

RNA degradation is a ubiquitous process that occurs in living and dead cells, as well as during handling and storage of extracted RNA. Reduced RNA quality caused by degradation is an established source of uncertainty for all RNA-based gene expression quantification techniques. RNA sequencing is an increasingly preferred method for transcriptome analyses, and dependence of its results on input RNA integrity is of significant practical importance. This study aimed to characterize the effects of varying input RNA integrity [estimated as RNA integrity number (RIN)] on transcript level estimates and delineate the characteristic differences between transcripts that differ in degradation rate. The study used ribodepleted total RNA sequencing data from a real-life clinically collected set (n=32) of human solid tissue (placenta) samples. RIN-dependent alterations in gene expression profiles were quantified by using DESeq2 software. Our results indicate that small differences in RNA integrity affect gene expression quantification by introducing a moderate and pervasive bias in expression level estimates that significantly affected 8.1% of studied genes. The rapidly degrading transcript pool was enriched in pseudogenes, short noncoding RNAs, and transcripts with extended 39 untranslated regions. Typical slowly degrading transcripts (median length, 2389 nt) represented protein coding genes with 4-10 exons and high guanine-cytosine content.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available