1.rna seq part1 workingtothegoal

Defining the goal of RNA-seq analysis for differential expressionJoachim Jacob20 and 27 January 2014

This presentation is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Please refer to http://www.bits.vib.be/ if you use this presentation or parts hereof.

Great power comes with great responsibility

RNA-seq enables one to

1) get an idea which are all active genes

2) quantify expression of each transcript

3) quantify alternative splicing

(use your imagination)

Principles of transcriptome analysis and gene expression quantification: an RNA-seq tutorial. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1755-0998.12109/abstract

Great power comes with great responsibility

You can't do all

RNA-seq is powerful, we have to aim for a certain goal.

Our goal is to detect differential expression

on the gene level.

Differential expression: useful?

What are we looking for? Explanations of observed phenotypes

yeast

GDA

Yeast mutant

GDA + vit C

why?

The central dogma

yeast

GDA

Yeast mutant

GDA + vit C

?

causes the phenotypic differences

The central dogma

yeast

GDA

Yeast mutant

GDA + vit C

?

Difference in protein activitycauses the phenotypic differences

The central dogma

yeast

GDA

Yeast mutant

GDA + vit C

?

Presence/concentration of proteins in a cellcauses the phenotypic differences

The central dogma

yeast

GDA

Yeast mutant

GDA + vit C

?

Level of protein productioncauses the phenotypic differences

The central dogma

yeast

GDA

Yeast mutant

GDA + vit C

?

Level of templates for protein productioncauses the phenotypic differences

The central dogma

yeast

GDA

Yeast mutant

GDA + vit C

?

Level of mRNA copiescauses the phenotypic differences

Does it hold?

Difference in protein activity

Level of mRNA copies

Level of templates for protein production

Level of protein production

Presence/concentration of proteins in a cell

Phenotype

Problem reduction

We can measure mRNA levels (much easier than protein levels). So we measure mRNA.The level of mRNA is a proxy of the level of protein activity causing the aberrant phenotype.

How to measure mRNA

1. Q-PCR (real-time)

2. Microarray

3. RNA-seq

A lot of work to measure few genes, in a relatively wide array of tissues. Very accurate.

Easier way to measure many predefined genes in a relatively wide array of tissues. Robust.

RNA-seq protocol in a nut shell

Get your sample Lyse the cells and extract RNA Convert the RNA to cDNA The cDNA pool get sequenced

The result is sequence information from scratch. No prior information is needed.

Yeast sample

Comprehensive comparative analysis of strand-specific RNA sequencing methods http://www.nature.com/nmeth/journal/v7/n9/full/nmeth.1491.html

Comparative analysis of RNA sequencing methods for degraded or low-input sampleshttp://www.nature.com/nmeth/journal/v10/n7/full/nmeth.2483.html

The predecessors of RNA-seq

ESTs: expressed sequence tags, ideal for discovery of new genes.

SAGE: serial analysis of gene expression, measurement of number of copies of mRNA

http://www.montana.edu/observatory/people/mcdermottlab.html


ESTs: expressed sequence tags, ideal for discovery of new genes.

SAGE: serial analysis of gene expression, measurement of number of copies of mRNA

http://www.sagenet.org/findings/index.html


ESTs: expressed sequence tags SAGE: serial analysis of gene expression

Low throughput: long sequence information, but for only ~thousands of genes.

Concept of measuring with RNA-seq

Extract mRNAand turn into cDNA

Fragment, ligateadaptor, amplify.

Put a fraction of the pool on sequencer to read fragments.

One template of protein production

Figure: All things must pass: contrasts and commonalities in eukaryotic and bacterial mRNA decay, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology 11, 467478

GeneA GeneB GeneC

RNA-seq protocol in a nut shell

Yeast sample

So many steps must fail our assumption

Phenotype

Proteins

mRNA levels

cDNA pool

RNA-seq reads

Represent the cDNA pool we've created

Represent the RNA pool we've extracted

Are a proxy for protein activity

Define the phenotype

So many steps must fail our assumption

Phenotype

Proteins

mRNA levels

cDNA pool

RNA-seq reads

Protein activity is regulated:Fosforylation, ubiquitination,...

mRNA templates havedifferent speeds of protein pro-Duction: availability of tRNAs, rate of mRNA degration, Alternative splicing events,...

Loss on RNA extraction, 90% of RNA in cell is rRNA, ligation

of adapters, conversion to cDNAnot 100%

Fail to map reads to correctgene, lane-specific biases onreading cDNA fragments,...

Consequence: focus on comparison

Phenotype A

Proteins

mRNA levels

cDNA pool

RNA-seq reads

Phenotype B

Proteins

mRNA levels

cDNA pool

RNA-seq reads

Possibly dueto differences in

expression

Consequence: focus on comparison

Phenotype A

Proteins

mRNA levels

cDNA pool

RNA-seq reads

Phenotype B

Proteins

mRNA levels

cDNA pool

RNA-seq reads

DESIGN OFEXPERIMENT

Comparing number of reads to genes

GeneA GeneB GeneC

sample

RNA-seq

Obviously, the number of reads is dependent on:1. the expression level of the gene2. the total number of reads generated3. the length of the transcript

OUR QUESTION

Normalisation is needed!Normalisation is needed!Normalisation is needed!

Experimental design

Our focus: which genes are differentially expressed between different conditions?

Obviously, the number of reads is dependent on:1. the expression level of the gene2. the total number of reads generated3. the length of the transcript

Which normalisation is needed?

How many reads to sequence?

Experimental design

Our focus: which genes are differentially expressed between different conditions?

How can we detect genes for which the counts of reads change between conditions more systematically than as expected by chance

We must design an experiment in which we can test this deviance from chance.

Oshlack et al. 2010. From RNA-seq reads to differential expression results. Genome Biology 2010, 11:220 http://genomebiology.com/2010/11/12/220


In other words: how deep to sequence? What is the required 'depth of sequencing'?

GeneA GeneB GeneC

sample

RNA-seq

RNA-seq

GeneA GeneB GeneC

The final test will look at ratios:6 5 35 6 4

1,2 0,83 0,75

sample


The difference between the lowest gene count and the highest gene count is typically 105. This is called the dynamic range.

Linear scale is useless. The logarithmic scale is better.

Wait! Something's not correct here!

Zero remains zero!

We are working with counts. A count is >=1. A gene with zero counts can be not yet sequenced (not deep enough) or is not expressed in that condition.

It is not a full logarithmic scale. It starts at zero.

0

So keep all counts above zero?

Assuming equal sequencing depth in the samples, and these counts. Do all these genes differ in expression? sample sample

GeneA 5 10 2

GeneB 15 30 2

GeneC 40 80 2

GeneD 100 200 2

GeneE 1000 2000 2

GeneZ 1 2 2

RATIO

So keep everything above zero?

sample sample

GeneA 11 10 0,91

GeneB 11 30 2,72

GeneC 60 80 1,33

GeneD 79 200 2,53

GeneE 1150 2000 1,74

GeneZ 5 1 0,20

RATIO

2?

Is there a trend in howthese numbers change?

Sequencing the result of the same steps again is called a technical replicate.

Technical replicates

sample

GeneA 11 5 4 4

GeneB 11 16 14 8

GeneC 60 45 32 38

GeneD 79 102 95 110

GeneE 1150 1023 987 1005

GeneZ 3 0 0 1

sample sample sample

We take the same cDNA pool and sequence it several times: technical replicates.

The poisson distribution

The counts of technical replicates follow a poisson distribution (Marioni et al 2008). The Poisson distribution can be applied to systems with a large number of possible events, each of which is rare.

From Wikipedia. Can be 3 different genes, each with their own poisson distribution. Lambda is the mean of the gene's distribution, with a certain number of reads.

Y=axis: chance to pick that number of reads.

The poisson distributionSo when we have 4 technical replicates sequenced up to a big depth (say 10 M reads). We can get by chance, these numbers for 3 different genes.

GeneA 0, 0, 1, 3

GeneB 2, 3, 4, 7

GeneC 8, 9, 11, 14

Working the intuition

How many blue balls?How many red balls?

Draw 10Draw 10 moreDraw 10 more

Estimate how large the fraction is in the set?

The intuition with the balls

Color 10 draws 20 draws 30 draws 40 draws

Blue

Red

No color

Conclusion of the experiment

How bigger the fraction in the pool, how quicker (i.e. with less sequencing depth) we are certain about the estimate of that fraction.

For lower counts, the variance is relatively bigger than the variance for higher counts.

CV (cofficient of variation) = sqrt(count)/count

Genes with lower expression need much deeper sequencing than genes with higher expression levels.

estimate=count; variance=count

Comparing counts

Here we show the overlap of Poisson distributions of single measurements at different read counts. Because relative Poisson uncertainty is high at low read counts, a count of 1 versus 2 has very little power to discriminate a true 2X fold change, though at higher counts a 2X fold change becomes significant.

In an actual experiment, the width of the distribution would be greater due to additional biological and technical uncertainty, but the uncertainty to the mean expression would narrow with each additional replicate.

Scotty: a web tool for designing RNA-Seq experiments to measure differential gene expression. Bioinformatics (2013) doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btt015

Comparing technical replicates

Risso et al. GC-Content Normalization for RNA-Seq DataBMC Bioinformatics 2011, 12:480

http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2105/12/480 - EDASeq package (R)

Correlation between meanand variance

according to Poisson

Lowess fit throughthe data

(Log2 of the counts)

(Log

2 of

the

coun

ts)

But poisson does not seem to fit

Extending the samples to real biological samples, this mean variance relationship does not hold...

Plotted using EDASeqPackage in R.

But poisson does not seem to fit

Extending the samples to real biological samples, this mean variance relationship does not hold!


Reasonable fit

Something is going on!

An extra source of variation

The Poisson distribution has an 'overdispersed' variance: the variance is bigger than expected for higher counts between biological replicates.


Something is going on!

An extra source of variation

Where Poisson: CV = std dev / mean => CV = 1/If an additional distribution is involved (also dependent on , the fraction of the gene in the cDNA pool), we have amixture of distributions:

CV = 1/ + Low counts! dispersion

Generalization of Poisson with this extra parameter: the Negative Binomial Model fits better!

The negative binomial model

The NB model fits observed expression data of RNA-seq better. It is a generalization of Poisson, and 2 parameters need to be estimated ( and )

Counts (gene g in sample j) has a Mean =

gj

Variance = gj +

g

gj

Biological CV = g

=> Biological CV = g

Methods differ in estimating this dispersion per gene:Can only be measured with true biological replicates

Variation summary, intuitively

Total CV = Technical CV + Biological CV

For low counts, the Poisson (technical) variation or the measurement error is dominant.

For higher counts, the Poisson variation gets smaller, and another source of variation becomes dominant, the dispersion or the biological variation. Biological variation does not get smaller with higher counts.

Beyond the NB model

It appears from analysis of many biological replicates (#=69) that not every gene can be modeled as NB: the Poisson-Tweedie model provides a further generalisation and a better fit for many genes (with an additional shape parameter).

Left figure: raw data shows that about 26% of the genes fit a NB model. Depending on the estimated shape parameter, other distributions fit better.

Esnaola et al. BMC Bioinformatics 2013, 14:254http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2105/14/254

Consequence for our design For low counts: the uncertainty is big due to Poisson

For high counts: the uncertainty is big due to biological variation. (highly expressed genes differ in their natural variation (regulated by cellular processes) more than lowly expressed genes).

If we focus on the ratios between the conditions: is it reasonable to set a restriction of fold change? Highly expressed genes can have a smaller and be significant. Lowly expressed genes can exceed 2.

Consequence on fold change

The readily applied cut-off in micro-array analysis is in RNA-seq not of use.

Blue and red: known DE genes

Volcanoplot

These cut-offs oftenapplied can prohibitdetecting DE genes

Long story to say...

We need to estimate the model behind the count.

Never work without biological replicates.

Never work with 2 biological replicates.

Try avoiding working with 3 biological replicates.

Go for at least 4 biological replicates.

Break?

Overview

GeneA GeneB GeneC

Sample 1RNA-seq

GeneA GeneB GeneC

Sample 2RNA-seq

GeneA GeneB GeneC

Sample 3RNA-seq

GeneA GeneB GeneC

Sample 4RNA-seq

GeneA GeneB GeneC

Sample 5RNA-seq

GeneA GeneB GeneC

Sample 6RNA-seq

Condition X

Condition Y

Summary

Obviously, the number of reads is dependent on:1. chance

Define the count model (NB) from replicates2. the expression level of the gene

Compare the ratios with a test2. the total number of reads generated3. the length of the transcript

The total number of reads generated

GeneA GeneB GeneC

sample

RNA-seq

The number of reads is dependent on the total number of reads generated. If one library is sequenced to 20M reads, and another one to 40M, most genes will ~double their counts.

GeneA GeneB GeneC

sample

More RNA-seq

Normalization for library size

Naive approach: divide by total library size. Is not applied anymore!

Why not? Composition matters!

2 things to remember:- zero sum system (or we cannot count what we can't sequence)- 5 orders of magnitude


2 things to remember:- zero sum system- 5 orders of magnitude

In every sample, a lot of reads are spend on few extremely highly expressed genes. Which genes? That differ between libraries, but affects negatively the nave size normalization if we include those genes.


Schematically: when normalized on library size (square represent number of reads).

Rest of the genesRest of the genes

Few genes with enormous counts: there is NO SATURATION of these counts

All counts for library A All counts for library B


Better normalization would be as shown below. DESeq2 and EdgeR apply such an approach (see later).

Rest of the genesRest of the genes

100%

100%

Gene length influence the count

Longer transcripts generate more reads

True! But the transcript length does not differ between samples. Since we are concerned with relative differences between samples, this needs no normalization (this story changes in case of absolute quantification).

Sample A Sample B

Gene A

Gene B

Gene A

Gene B

Between sample variation

Properties of libraries/samples can effect the counts, and lead to variation. This is called between-lane variation. Obvious ones: library size (how many reads are sampled), library composition.

Different libraries/samples can exhibit increased variation by differing in how gene properties relate to gene counts. This is called within-lane variation.

GC-content of genes can influence counts

GC-content differs between genes. But it does not change between samples, so there should be no problem for relative expression comparison.

We can visualize the relationship between counts and GC very easily (see right). There is some trend, and it is equal for all samples.

EDAseq (R)

GC-content of genes can influence counts

Sometimes, samples show different relationships between GC-content of the genes and the counts.

This within-lane variation (or intra-sample) variation needs to be corrected for, so that in one sample not all differentially expressed genes are also the GC-riched ones.

Length can have also this effect.

What we need to know for our set-up

We want to detect differentially expressed genes between 2 or more conditions.

For this, we need to apply the conditions in a controlled environment (randomisation,...).

For good testing, we need to have some biological replicates per condition.

For cost effectiveness, we determine how deep we will sequence from each sample.

We analyse the reads, get raw counts and do the test!

Library preparation and lane loading

HiSeq2000: 24 single-index barcodes available. 1 lane gives 150-180 M reads. One lane of 50 bp SE approx 1.500.

Bioinformatics analysis will take most of your time

Quality control (QC) of raw reads

Preprocessing: filtering of reads and read parts, to help our goal of differential detection.

QC of preprocessing Mapping to a reference genome(alternative: to a transcriptome)

QC of the mapping

Count table extraction

QC of the count table

DE test

Biological insight

Bioinformatics analysis will take most of your time

Quality control (QC) of raw reads

Preprocessing: filtering of reads and read parts, to help our goal of differential detection.

QC of preprocessing Mapping to a reference genome(alternative: to a transcriptome)

QC of the mapping

Count table extraction

QC of the count table

DE test

Biological insight

1

2

3

4

5

6

Overview

http://www.nature.com/nprot/journal/v8/n9/full/nprot.2013.099.html

The numbers get reduced with every step

20M

25M

15M

Deeper, or more replicates?

Variance will be lower with more reads: but sequencing another biological replicate is preferred over sequencing deeper, or technical reps.

Doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btt015

There is tool to help you set up

Scotty power analysis

Power: the probability to reject the null hypothesis if the alternative is true.

'How many samples and how deep in order to minimize false negatives'.

(a null hypothesis is always a scenario in which there is no difference, hence no differential expression).

Alternative tools:

http://wiki.bits.vib.be/index.php/RNAseq_toolbox

Help with design

http://wiki.bits.vib.be/index.php/RNAseq_toolbox http://rnaseq.uoregon.edu/exp_design.html

How many samples to sequence?

Scotty exercise

KeywordsA read count of a gene is dependent on:

1. chance

2. expression level

3. transcript length

4. depth of sequencing

5. GC-content

Poisson distribution

Negative binomial distribution

Condition

Sample

Normalization

Write in your own words what the terms mean

Reads

All my references available at:https://www.zotero.org/groups/dernaseq/items

Slide 1Slide 2Slide 3Slide 4Slide 5Slide 6Slide 7Slide 8Slide 9Slide 10Slide 11Slide 12Slide 13Slide 14Slide 15Slide 16Slide 17Slide 18Slide 19Slide 20Slide 21Slide 22Slide 23Slide 24Slide 25Slide 26Slide 27Slide 28Slide 29Slide 30Slide 31Slide 32Slide 33Slide 34Slide 35Slide 36Slide 37Slide 38Slide 39Slide 40Slide 41Slide 42Slide 43Slide 44Slide 45Slide 46Slide 47Slide 48Slide 49Slide 50Slide 51Slide 52Slide 53Slide 54Slide 55Slide 56Slide 57Slide 58Slide 59Slide 60Slide 61Slide 62Slide 63Slide 64Slide 65Slide 66Slide 67Slide 68Slide 69Slide 70Slide 71Slide 72Slide 73Slide 74Slide 75

1.rna seq part1 workingtothegoal

Documents

seq analysis

predecessors of rna

goal of rna

rnaseq tutorial

extract rna

seq ests

level of protein activity

protein levels