Publication: Comparative analysis of pacbio and oxford nanopore sequencing technologies for transcriptomic landscape identification of penaeus monodon
Issued Date
2021-08-01
Resource Type
ISSN
20751729
Other identifier(s)
2-s2.0-85113975398
Rights
Mahidol University
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Life. Vol.11, No.8 (2021)
Suggested Citation
Zulema Udaondo, Kanchana Sittikankaew, Tanaporn Uengwetwanit, Thidathip Wongsurawat, Chutima Sonthirod, Piroon Jenjaroenpun, Wirulda Pootakham, Nitsara Karoonuthaisiri, Intawat Nookaew Comparative analysis of pacbio and oxford nanopore sequencing technologies for transcriptomic landscape identification of penaeus monodon. Life. Vol.11, No.8 (2021). doi:10.3390/life11080862 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/75604
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Thesis
Title
Comparative analysis of pacbio and oxford nanopore sequencing technologies for transcriptomic landscape identification of penaeus monodon
Abstract
With the advantages that long-read sequencing platforms such as Pacific Biosciences (Menlo Park, CA, USA) (PacBio) and Oxford Nanopore Technologies (Oxford, UK) (ONT) can offer, various research fields such as genomics and transcriptomics can exploit their benefits. Selecting an appropriate sequencing platform is undoubtedly crucial for the success of the research outcome, thus there is a need to compare these long-read sequencing platforms and evaluate them for specific research questions. This study aims to compare the performance of PacBio and ONT platforms for transcriptomic analysis by utilizing transcriptome data from three different tissues (hepatopancreas, intestine, and gonads) of the juvenile black tiger shrimp, Penaeus monodon. We compared three important features: (i) main characteristics of the sequencing libraries and their alignment with the reference genome, (ii) transcript assembly features and isoform identification, and (iii) correlation of the quantification of gene expression levels for both platforms. Our analyses suggest that read-length bias and differences in sequencing throughput are highly influential factors when using long reads in transcriptome studies. These comparisons can provide a guideline when designing a transcriptome study utilizing these two long-read sequencing technologies.