Comprehensive Multi-Center Assessment of Small RNA-seq Methods for Quantitative Mirna Profiling
Maria D Giraldez,Ryan M Spengler,Alton Etheridge,Paula M Godoy,Andrea J Barczak,Srimeenakshi Srinivasan,Peter L De Hoff,Kahraman Tanriverdi,Amanda Courtright,Shulin Lu,Joseph Khoory,Renee Rubio,David Baxter,Tom A P Driedonks,Henk P J Buermans,Esther N M Nolte-'t Hoen,Hui Jiang,Kai Wang,Ionita Ghiran,Yaoyu E Wang,Kendall Van Keuren-Jensen,Jane E Freedman,Prescott G Woodruff,Louise C Laurent,David J Erle,David J Galas,Muneesh Tewari
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.4183
IF: 46.9
2018-01-01
Nature Biotechnology
Abstract:Systematic evaluation of library preparation methods for small RNA-seq identifies reproducible and accurate methods. RNA-seq is increasingly used for quantitative profiling of small RNAs (for example, microRNAs, piRNAs and snoRNAs) in diverse sample types, including isolated cells, tissues and cell-free biofluids. The accuracy and reproducibility of the currently used small RNA-seq library preparation methods have not been systematically tested. Here we report results obtained by a consortium of nine labs that independently sequenced reference, 'ground truth' samples of synthetic small RNAs and human plasma-derived RNA. We assessed three commercially available library preparation methods that use adapters of defined sequence and six methods using adapters with degenerate bases. Both protocol- and sequence-specific biases were identified, including biases that reduced the ability of small RNA-seq to accurately measure adenosine-to-inosine editing in microRNAs. We found that these biases were mitigated by library preparation methods that incorporate adapters with degenerate bases. MicroRNA relative quantification between samples using small RNA-seq was accurate and reproducible across laboratories and methods.