De novo likelihood-based measures for comparing genome assemblies

Abstract

BackgroundThe current revolution in genomics has been made possible by software tools called genome assemblers, which stitch together DNA fragments “read” by sequencing machines into complete or nearly complete genome sequences. Despite decades of research in this field and the development of dozens of genome assemblers, assessing and comparing the quality of assembled genome sequences still relies on the availability of independently determined standards, such as manually curated genome sequences, or independently produced mapping data. These “gold standards” can be expensive to produce and may only cover a small fraction of the genome, which limits their applicability to newly generated genome sequences. Here we introduce a de novo probabilistic measure of assembly quality which allows for an objective comparison of multiple assemblies generated from the same set of reads. We define the quality of a sequence produced by an assembler as the conditional probability of observing the sequenced reads from the assembled sequence. A key property of our metric is that the true genome sequence maximizes the score, unlike other commonly used metrics.ResultsWe demonstrate that our de novo score can be computed quickly and accurately in a practical setting even for large datasets, by estimating the score from a relatively small sample of the reads. To demonstrate the benefits of our score, we measure the quality of the assemblies generated in the GAGE and Assemblathon 1 assembly “bake-offs” with our metric. Even without knowledge of the true reference sequence, our de novo metric closely matches the reference-based evaluation metrics used in the studies and outperforms other de novo metrics traditionally used to measure assembly quality (such as N50). Finally, we highlight the application of our score to optimize assembly parameters used in genome assemblers, which enables better assemblies to be produced, even without prior knowledge of the genome being assembled.ConclusionLikelihood-based measures, such as ours proposed here, will become the new standard for de novo assembly evaluation.

A molecular portrait of maternal sepsis from Byzantine Troy

“…iMetAMOS uses FastQC [www.bioinformatics.babraham.ac.uk/projects/fastqc] to check read data quality. Assemblies were evaluated using QUAST (Gurevich et al, 2013), REAPR (Hunt et al, 2013), LAP (Ghodsi et al, 2013), ALE (Clark et al, 2013), FreeBayes (Garrison and Marth, 2012), and CGAL (Rahman et al, 2013). Additionally, Kraken (Wood et al, 2014) was run to detect potential contamination in sequence data.…”

The Genome 10K Project: A Way Forward

“…When CGAL was applied to the Assemblathon 1 data set, assemblies with a higher extent of coverage tended to be more accurate. These methods allow researchers to optimize parameters associated with assembly programs to obtain better-quality assemblies (with higher likelihood values) and are likely to become standard tools in obtaining high-quality assemblies (25). …”

“…One assembly program, Metassembler (M. Schatz, unpublished data; http://schatzlab.cshl.edu/presentations/2011-11-03.Genome%20Informatics.pdf), actually does this, but its accuracy is no better than its best constituents. Assembly is a complex problem with many trade-offs, and there are no easy solutions (25). Has genome assembly with short reads reached a point of diminishing returns?…”

NxRepair: Error correction in de novo sequence assembly using Nextera mate pairs

“…Recent work, such as the Assemblathon (Bradnam et al, 2013) and GAGE (Salzberg et al, 2012) collaborations, compare the quality of assemblies prepared by various assemblers. A Bayesian method of assembly quality evaluation also exists (Ghodsi et al, 2013). Several recent papers have developed error identification and correction methods.…”