↓ Skip to main content

On the optimal trimming of high-throughput mRNA sequence data

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
49 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
177 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
520 Mendeley
citeulike
7 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
On the optimal trimming of high-throughput mRNA sequence data
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, January 2014
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2014.00013
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthew D. MacManes

Abstract

The widespread and rapid adoption of high-throughput sequencing technologies has afforded researchers the opportunity to gain a deep understanding of genome level processes that underlie evolutionary change, and perhaps more importantly, the links between genotype and phenotype. In particular, researchers interested in functional biology and adaptation have used these technologies to sequence mRNA transcriptomes of specific tissues, which in turn are often compared to other tissues, or other individuals with different phenotypes. While these techniques are extremely powerful, careful attention to data quality is required. In particular, because high-throughput sequencing is more error-prone than traditional Sanger sequencing, quality trimming of sequence reads should be an important step in all data processing pipelines. While several software packages for quality trimming exist, no general guidelines for the specifics of trimming have been developed. Here, using empirically derived sequence data, I provide general recommendations regarding the optimal strength of trimming, specifically in mRNA-Seq studies. Although very aggressive quality trimming is common, this study suggests that a more gentle trimming, specifically of those nucleotides whose Phred score <2 or <5, is optimal for most studies across a wide variety of metrics.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 49 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 520 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 15 3%
United Kingdom 4 <1%
Germany 3 <1%
Spain 3 <1%
Norway 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Other 4 <1%
Unknown 484 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 131 25%
Researcher 105 20%
Student > Master 74 14%
Student > Bachelor 42 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 33 6%
Other 64 12%
Unknown 71 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 252 48%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 124 24%
Computer Science 19 4%
Environmental Science 15 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 7 1%
Other 21 4%
Unknown 82 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 38. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 July 2023.
All research outputs
#1,034,281
of 24,701,594 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#171
of 13,311 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,462
of 316,959 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#3
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,701,594 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,311 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 316,959 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.