IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0011652.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Occupancy Modeling, Maximum Contig Size Probabilities and Designing Metagenomics Experiments

Author

Listed:
  • Stephen A Stanhope

Abstract

Mathematical aspects of coverage and gaps in genome assembly have received substantial attention by bioinformaticians. Typical problems under consideration suppose that reads can be experimentally obtained from a single genome and that the number of reads will be set to cover a large percentage of that genome at a desired depth. In metagenomics experiments genomes from multiple species are simultaneously analyzed and obtaining large numbers of reads per genome is unlikely. We propose the probability of obtaining at least one contig of a desired minimum size from each novel genome in the pool without restriction based on depth of coverage as a metric for metagenomic experimental design. We derive an approximation to the distribution of maximum contig size for single genome assemblies using relatively few reads. This approximation is verified in simulation studies and applied to a number of different metagenomic experimental design problems, ranging in difficulty from detecting a single novel genome in a pool of known species to detecting each of a random number of novel genomes collectively sized and with abundances corresponding to given distributions in a single pool.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephen A Stanhope, 2010. "Occupancy Modeling, Maximum Contig Size Probabilities and Designing Metagenomics Experiments," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(7), pages 1-10, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0011652
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0011652
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0011652
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0011652&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0011652?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0011652. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.