On the optimal design of metabolic RNA labeling experiments

PLoS Comput Biol. 2019 Aug 7;15(8):e1007252. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007252. eCollection 2019 Aug.

Abstract

Massively parallel RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) in combination with metabolic labeling has become the de facto standard approach to study alterations in RNA transcription, processing or decay. Regardless of advances in the experimental protocols and techniques, every experimentalist needs to specify the key aspects of experimental design: For example, which protocol should be used (biochemical separation vs. nucleotide conversion) and what is the optimal labeling time? In this work, we provide approximate answers to these questions using the asymptotic theory of optimal design. Specifically, we investigate, how the variance of degradation rate estimates depends on the time and derive the optimal time for any given degradation rate. Subsequently, we show that an increase in sample numbers should be preferred over an increase in sequencing depth. Lastly, we provide some guidance on use cases when laborious biochemical separation outcompetes recent nucleotide conversion based methods (such as SLAMseq) and show, how inefficient conversion influences the precision of estimates. Code and documentation can be found at https://github.com/dieterich-lab/DesignMetabolicRNAlabeling.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Computational Biology
  • High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing / methods
  • High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing / statistics & numerical data
  • Humans
  • Kinetics
  • MCF-7 Cells
  • Models, Biological
  • RNA / genetics*
  • RNA / metabolism*
  • RNA Processing, Post-Transcriptional
  • RNA Stability*
  • Sequence Analysis, RNA / methods
  • Sequence Analysis, RNA / statistics & numerical data
  • Transcription, Genetic

Substances

  • RNA

Grants and funding

IND would like to acknowledge funding by the DFG (NA 1273/1-1). AU and CD were supported by the Klaus Tschira Stiftung gGmbH (grant 00.219.2013) and DFG SPP 1784 (DI 1501/11-1). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.