4.5 Article

EDAR: An Efficient Error Detection and Removal Algorithm for Next Generation Sequencing Data

期刊

JOURNAL OF COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY
卷 17, 期 11, 页码 1549-1560

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/cmb.2010.0127

关键词

error detection/correction; high-coverage short read data; next-generation sequencing; variable bandwidth mean-shift clustering

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Genomic sequencing techniques introduce experimental errors into reads which can mislead sequence assembly efforts and complicate the diagnostic process. Here we present a method for detecting and removing sequencing errors from reads generated in genomic shotgun sequencing projects prior to sequence assembly. For each input read, the set of all length k substrings (k-mers) it contains are calculated. The read is evaluated based on the frequency with which each k-mer occurs in the complete data set (k-count). For each read, k-mers are clustered using the variable-bandwidth mean-shift algorithm. Based on the k-count of the cluster center, clusters are classified as error regions or non-error regions. For the 23 real and simulated data sets tested (454 and Solexa), our algorithm detected error regions that cover 99% of all errors. A heuristic algorithm is then applied to detect the location of errors in each putative error region. A read is corrected by removing the errors, thereby creating two or more smaller, error-free read fragments. After performing error removal, the error-rate for all data sets tested decreased (similar to 35-fold reduction, on average). EDAR has comparable accuracy to methods that correct rather than remove errors and when the error rate is greater than 3% for simulated data sets, it performs better. The performance of the Velvet assembler is generally better with error-removed data. However, for short reads, splitting at the location of errors can be problematic. Following error detection with error correction, rather than removal, may improve the assembly results.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据