↓ Skip to main content

Quality control of next-generation sequencing data without a reference

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, May 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 (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
29 X users
patent
1 patent
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
78 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
321 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
Quality control of next-generation sequencing data without a reference
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, May 2014
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2014.00111
Pubmed ID
Authors

Urmi H. Trivedi, Timothée Cézard, Stephen Bridgett, Anna Montazam, Jenna Nichols, Mark Blaxter, Karim Gharbi

Abstract

Next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies have dramatically expanded the breadth of genomics. Genome-scale data, once restricted to a small number of biomedical model organisms, can now be generated for virtually any species at remarkable speed and low cost. Yet non-model organisms often lack a suitable reference to map sequence reads against, making alignment-based quality control (QC) of NGS data more challenging than cases where a well-assembled genome is already available. Here we show that by generating a rapid, non-optimized draft assembly of raw reads, it is possible to obtain reliable and informative QC metrics, thus removing the need for a high quality reference. We use benchmark datasets generated from control samples across a range of genome sizes to illustrate that QC inferences made using draft assemblies are broadly equivalent to those made using a well-established reference, and describe QC tools routinely used in our production facility to assess the quality of NGS data from non-model organisms.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 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 321 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 1%
India 3 <1%
France 2 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Other 5 2%
Unknown 300 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 64 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 45 14%
Student > Bachelor 45 14%
Student > Master 45 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 5%
Other 36 11%
Unknown 70 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 108 34%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 81 25%
Computer Science 20 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 2%
Chemistry 3 <1%
Other 22 7%
Unknown 81 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 16 May 2019.
All research outputs
#1,518,529
of 23,342,232 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#311
of 12,364 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,999
of 228,809 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#5
of 115 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,342,232 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,364 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 228,809 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 115 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 95% of its contemporaries.