Fig. 3: Comparison between BOLT-seq and the canonical RNA-seq method. | Experimental & Molecular Medicine

Fig. 3: Comparison between BOLT-seq and the canonical RNA-seq method.

From: Cost and time-efficient construction of a 3′-end mRNA library from unpurified bulk RNA in a single tube

Fig. 3

Comparison between BOLT-seq and the canonical TRACE-seq and NEBNext methods. All replicates were subsampled to 1 M (replicates: NEBNext n = 3, TRACE-seq n = 3, BOLT-seq n = 3). a Venn diagrams show overlapping subsets of DE genes detected with NEBNext and BOLT-seq (left) or TRACE-seq and BOLT-seq (right). NEBNext and TRACE-seq were performed using 200 ng of total RNA purified from HEK293T or A549 cells. BOLT-seq was performed using the lysates of 1000 HEK293T or A549 cells. b Correlation between the log2-fold change (lfc) of DE genes detected by NEBNext and BOLT-seq (left) or TRACE-seq and BOLT-seq (right). Cutoff criteria were threshold: |lfc| > 1, p-adj <0.05).

Back to article page