Search

The peroxisomal targeting signal type 1 (PTS1) is a seemingly simple peptide sequence at the C-terminal end of most peroxisomal matrix proteins. PTS1 can be described as a tripeptide with the consensus motif [S/A/C] [K/R/H] L. However, this description is neither necessary nor sufficient. It does not cover all cases of PTS1 proteins, and some proteins in accordance with this consensus do not target to the peroxisome. In order to find new PTS proteins in yeast and to arrive at a more complete description of the PTS1 consensus motif, we developed a machine learning approach that involves orthologue expansion of the set of known peroxisomal proteins. We performed a genome-wide in silico screen, characterised several PTS1-containing peptides and identified two new peroxisomal matrix proteins, which we named Pxp1 (Yel020c) and Pxp2 (Yjr111c). Based on these in silico and in vivo analyses, we revised the yeast PTS1 consensus which now includes all known PTS1 proteins.

Background Differential expression analysis on the basis of RNA-Seq count data has become a standard tool in transcriptomics. Several studies have shown that prior normalization of the data is crucial for a reliable detection of transcriptional differences. Until now it has not been clear whether and how the transcriptomic approach can be used for differential expression analysis in metatranscriptomics. Methods We propose a model for differential expression in metatranscriptomics that explicitly accounts for variations in the taxonomic composition of transcripts across different samples. As a main consequence the correct normalization of metatranscriptomic count data under this model requires the taxonomic separation of the data into organism-specific bins. Then the taxon-specific scaling of organism profiles yields a valid normalization and allows us to recombine the scaled profiles into a metatranscriptomic count matrix. This matrix can then be analyzed with statistical tools for transcriptomic count data. For taxon-specific scaling and recombination of scaled counts we provide a simple R script. Results When applying transcriptomic tools for differential expression analysis directly to metatranscriptomic data with an organism-independent (global) scaling of counts the resulting differences may be difficult to interpret. The differences may correspond to changing functional profiles of the contributing organisms but may also result from a variation of taxonomic abundances. Taxon-specific scaling eliminates this variation and therefore the resulting differences actually reflect a different behavior of organisms under changing conditions. In simulation studies we show that the divergence between results from global and taxon-specific scaling can be drastic. In particular, the variation of organism abundances can imply a considerable increase of significant differences with global scaling. Also, on real metatranscriptomic data, the predictions from taxon-specific and global scaling can differ widely. Our studies indicate that in real data applications performed with global scaling it might be impossible to distinguish between differential expression in terms of transcriptomic changes and differential composition in terms of changing taxonomic proportions. Conclusions As in transcriptomics, a proper normalization of count data is also essential for differential expression analysis in metatranscriptomics. Our model implies a taxon-specific scaling of counts for normalization of the data. The application of taxon-specific scaling consequently removes taxonomic composition variations from functional profiles and therefore provides a clear interpretation of the observed functional differences.

Methods for assembly, taxonomic profiling and binning are key to interpreting metagenome data, but a lack of consensus about benchmarking complicates performance assessment. The Critical Assessment of Metagenome Interpretation (CAMI) challenge has engaged the global developer community to benchmark their programs on highly complex and realistic data sets, generated from ∼700 newly sequenced microorganisms and ∼600 novel viruses and plasmids and representing common experimental setups. Assembly and genome binning programs performed well for species represented by individual genomes but were substantially affected by the presence of related strains. Taxonomic profiling and binning programs were proficient at high taxonomic ranks, with a notable performance decrease below family level. Parameter settings markedly affected performance, underscoring their importance for program reproducibility. The CAMI results highlight current challenges but also provide a roadmap for software selection to answer specific research questions., Nature Methods, 14 (11), ISSN:1548-7105, ISSN:1548-7091