MOESM1 of Comparative performance of the BGISEQ-500 and Illumina HiSeq4000 sequencing platforms for transcriptome analysis in plants

Autor: Zhu, Fu-Yuan, Mo-Xian Chen, Neng-Hui Ye, Wang-Min Qiao, Gao, Bei, Wai-Ki Law, Tian, Yuan, Zhang, Dong, Zhang, Di, Tie-Yuan Liu, Qi-Juan Hu, Cao, Yun-Ying, Ze-Zhuo Su, Jianhua Zhang, Ying-Gao Liu
Rok vydání: 2018
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.6963668
Popis: Additional file 1: Figure S1. Schematic view of library construction procedures of BGISEQ-500 in this study. Figure S2. Base composition among three sequencing approaches. Figure S3. Comparison of method-specific gene quantification. Figure S4. Repeatability of gene quantification. Figure S5. GO analysis of DEGs identified by three sequencing approaches. Figure S6. Methods in DEGs identification and comparisons of biological interpretation. Figure S7. Pathway enrichment of each sequencing approach by using DEG calling software AudicS. Figure S8. Pathway enrichment of each sequencing approach by using DEG calling software Cuffdiff. Figure S9. Pathway enrichment of each sequencing approach by using DEG calling software DEGseq. Figure S10. Pathway enrichment of each sequencing approach by using DEG calling software edgeR. Figure S11. Inter-platform comparison for AS events identification. Figure S12. Intra-platform comparison of AS identification by BGISEQ-500 PE75 approach. Figure S13. Intra-platform comparison of AS identification by BGISEQ-500 PE100 approach. Figure S14. Intra-platform comparison of AS identification by HiSeq4000 PE100 approach. Figure S15. Intra-platform comparison of AS identification by three approaches. Figure S16. Intra- and inter-platform comparison for SNP identification. Figure S17. Intra- and inter-platform comparison for INDEL identification.
Databáze: OpenAIRE