Abstract
RNA interference was first described in the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans. Ever since, several new endogenous small RNA pathways have been described and characterized to different degrees. The very prominent secondary small interfering RNAs, also called 22G-RNAs, bear a 5′ triphosphate group after loading into an Argonaute protein. This creates a technical issue, since 5′PPP groups decrease cloning efficiency for small RNA sequencing. To increase cloning efficiency of these small RNA species, a common practice in the field is the treatment of RNA samples, prior to library preparation, with Tobacco Acid pyrophosphatase (TAP). Recently, TAP production and supply was discontinued, so an alternative must be devised. We turned to RNA 5′ pyrophosphohydrolase (RppH), a commercially available pyrophosphatase isolated from E. coli. Here we directly compare TAP and RppH in their use for small RNA library preparation. We show that RppH-treated samples faithfully recapitulate TAP-treated samples. Specifically, there is enrichment for 22G-RNAs and mapped small RNA reads show no small RNA transcriptome-wide differences between RppH and TAP treatment. We propose that RppH can be used as a small RNA pyrophosphatase to enrich for triphosphorylated small RNA species and show that RppH- and TAP-derived datasets can be used in direct comparison.•We show that treatment of small RNA samples with RppH prior to sequencing library preparation increases the cloning efficiency of 5′ triphosphorylated small RNAs;•RppH treatment is a valid alternative to TAP treatment.
Highlights
We show that treatment of small RNA samples with RNA pyrophosphohydrolase (RppH) prior to sequencing library preparation increases the cloning efficiency of 50 triphosphorylated small RNAs;
RppH and Tobacco Acid pyrophosphatase (TAP) sample correlation To determine the similarity between libraries, two approaches were used: (1) the genome was divided into sized bins and reads mapping to each bin were counted (DeepTools, multiBamSummary bins); or (2) reads mapping to a set of published 22G-RNA targets (DeepTools, multiBamSummary BED-file)
To address if RppH treatment enriches for 22G-RNAs as efficiently as TAP, we sequenced small RNAs of wild-type adult worms with prior treatment with TAP or RppH. To properly compare both treatments, we sequenced three technical replicates of TAP treatment and three technical replicates of RppH treatment, all derived from a unique biological sample
Summary
We treated small RNAs from C. elegans with TAP and RppH and compared their performance in regard to 22G-RNA enrichment. Libraries for untreated samples, originating from a different biological replicate, were prepared using the protocol above, but were sequenced as single-read on HiSeq 2500 (Illumina).
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.