Anhui Province Key Laboratory of Medical Physics and Technology, Institute of Health and Medical Technology, Hefei Institutes of Physical Science, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hefei, Anhui Province 230031, China.
Hefei Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hefei, Anhui Province 230031, China.
Brief Bioinform. 2024 Jul 25;25(5). doi: 10.1093/bib/bbae440.
Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) methylation plays a key role in gene regulation and is critical for development and human disease. Techniques such as whole-genome bisulfite sequencing (WGBS) and reduced representation bisulfite sequencing (RRBS) allow DNA methylation analysis at the genome scale, with Illumina NovaSeq 6000 and MGI Tech DNBSEQ-T7 being popular due to their efficiency and affordability. However, detailed comparative studies of their performance are not available. In this study, we constructed 60 WGBS and RRBS libraries for two platforms using different types of clinical samples and generated approximately 2.8 terabases of sequencing data. We systematically compared quality control metrics, genomic coverage, CpG methylation levels, intra- and interplatform correlations, and performance in detecting differentially methylated positions. Our results revealed that the DNBSEQ platform exhibited better raw read quality, although base quality recalibration indicated potential overestimation of base quality. The DNBSEQ platform also showed lower sequencing depth and less coverage uniformity in GC-rich regions than did the NovaSeq platform and tended to enrich methylated regions. Overall, both platforms demonstrated robust intra- and interplatform reproducibility for RRBS and WGBS, with NovaSeq performing better for WGBS, highlighting the importance of considering these factors when selecting a platform for bisulfite sequencing.
脱氧核糖核酸(DNA)甲基化在基因调控中起着关键作用,对于发育和人类疾病至关重要。全基因组亚硫酸氢盐测序(WGBS)和简化代表性亚硫酸氢盐测序(RRBS)等技术可在全基因组范围内进行 DNA 甲基化分析,Illumina NovaSeq 6000 和 MGI Tech DNBSEQ-T7 因其效率和价格优势而受到青睐。然而,它们的性能尚无详细的比较研究。在这项研究中,我们使用不同类型的临床样本构建了两个平台的 60 个 WGBS 和 RRBS 文库,生成了大约 28 太字节的测序数据。我们系统地比较了质量控制指标、基因组覆盖度、CpG 甲基化水平、平台内和平台间的相关性以及检测差异甲基化位置的性能。结果表明,DNBSEQ 平台的原始读取质量更好,尽管碱基质量再校准表明碱基质量可能被高估。与 NovaSeq 平台相比,DNBSEQ 平台在 GC 丰富区域的测序深度较低,覆盖均匀性较差,并且倾向于富集甲基化区域。总体而言,两个平台都显示出 RRBS 和 WGBS 的稳健的平台内和平台间重现性,NovaSeq 平台在 WGBS 方面表现更好,这强调了在选择亚硫酸氢盐测序平台时考虑这些因素的重要性。