↓ Skip to main content

A glance at quality score: implication for de novo transcriptome reconstruction of Illumina reads

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
14 X users

Readers on

mendeley
126 Mendeley
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
A glance at quality score: implication for de novo transcriptome reconstruction of Illumina reads
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, January 2014
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2014.00017
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stanley Kimbung Mbandi, Uljana Hesse, D. Jasper G. Rees, Alan Christoffels

Abstract

Downstream analyses of short-reads from next-generation sequencing platforms are often preceded by a pre-processing step that removes uncalled and wrongly called bases. Standard approaches rely on their associated base quality scores to retain the read or a portion of it when the score is above a predefined threshold. It is difficult to differentiate sequencing error from biological variation without a reference using quality scores. The effects of quality score based trimming have not been systematically studied in de novo transcriptome assembly. Using RNA-Seq data produced from Illumina, we teased out the effects of quality score based filtering or trimming on de novo transcriptome reconstruction. We showed that assemblies produced from reads subjected to different quality score thresholds contain truncated and missing transfrags when compared to those from untrimmed reads. Our data supports the fact that de novo assembling of untrimmed data is challenging for de Bruijn graph assemblers. However, our results indicates that comparing the assemblies from untrimmed and trimmed read subsets can suggest appropriate filtering parameters and enable selection of the optimum de novo transcriptome assembly in non-model organisms.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 126 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
Italy 2 2%
Germany 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Russia 1 <1%
Other 3 2%
Unknown 111 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 25%
Researcher 28 22%
Student > Master 20 16%
Student > Bachelor 8 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Other 21 17%
Unknown 11 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 81 64%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 15%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 2%
Computer Science 2 2%
Environmental Science 2 2%
Other 5 4%
Unknown 14 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 23 March 2016.
All research outputs
#2,300,361
of 24,383,935 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#542
of 13,127 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,585
of 315,490 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#6
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,383,935 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,127 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 315,490 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 91% 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 90% of its contemporaries.