Abstract
BackgroundWhole-genome sequencing (WGS) is becoming an increasingly important tool for detecting genomic variation. Blood derived DNA is the current standard for WGS for research or clinical purposes but may not always be feasible to acquire. The usability of DNA from saliva for WGS is not known. We compared the quality of WGS between blood versus saliva derived DNA.MethodsWGS was performed in DNA from 531 blood and 502 saliva samples (including 5 paired samples) from participants enrolled in a heart disease biorepository. We compared the proportion of sequencing reads that mapped to non-human sources (microbiome), the sequencing coverage, and the yield and concordance of single nucleotide variant (SNV) and copy number variant (CNV) calls between blood and saliva genomes.ResultsOf 531 blood and 502 saliva samples, 46% saliva DNA failed quality control (QC) requirements for WGS compared to 6% QC failure for blood DNA. An average of 10.7% WGS reads in the saliva samples mapped to the human oral microbiome compared to 0.09% WGS reads in blood samples. However, these reads were readily excluded by excluding reads that did not map to the human reference genome. Sequencing coverage met or exceeded the target sequencing depth of 30x in all the blood samples and 4 of the 5 saliva samples; the fifth saliva sample had an average sequencing depth of 22.6x. Over 95% of SNVs identified in saliva were concordant with those identified in blood across the genome, within all gene coding regions, and within cardiovascular disease-related gene coding regions. Rare SNVs, defined as those with a minor allele frequency of less than 1% in the Genome Aggregation Database, had a lower concordance of 90% between blood and saliva genomes. CNVs had only 76% concordance between blood and saliva samples.ConclusionsHigh quality saliva samples that meet stringent QC criteria can be used for WGS when blood-derived DNA is not available or is not suitable. Saliva DNA provides an acceptable yield of SNV calls but has a lower yield for CNV calls compared to blood DNA.
Highlights
Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) is becoming an increasingly important tool for detecting genomic variation
Our results showed that a higher proportion of saliva samples may not meet the stringent quality control (QC) criteria required for WGS
Our study showed that saliva genomes derived from high quality
Summary
Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) is becoming an increasingly important tool for detecting genomic variation. Blood derived DNA is the current standard for WGS for research or clinical purposes but may not always be feasible to acquire. We compared the quality of WGS between blood versus saliva derived DNA. As the cost of sequencing continues to decrease, whole genome sequencing (WGS) is being increasingly used for both research and clinical applications to study the role of genetic variation in human disease. The use of blood derived DNA is the current standard for WGS. Published studies report that saliva-derived DNA can be used for array genotyping [1] and whole-exome sequencing [2] as long as the quantity of human DNA in each sample is sufficient. There have been very few studies comparing WGS results from paired blood and saliva-derived DNA. The limitations of saliva samples are the lower DNA yield from saliva, microbial contamination if saliva is not properly collected, as well as the inability of younger children to provide saliva as per instructions
Published Version (Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have