Mobile Genetic Elements pp 69-90

Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 859) | Cite as

To Detect and Analyze Sequence Repeats Whatever Be Their Origin

Protocol

Abstract

The development of numerous programs for the identification of mobile elements raises the issue of the founding concepts that are shared in their design. This is necessary for at least three reasons. First, the cost of designing, developing, debugging, and maintaining software could present a danger of distracting biologists from their main bioanalysis tasks that require a lot of energy. Some key concepts on exact repeats are always underlying the search for genomic repeats and we recall the most important ones. All along the chapter, we try to select practical tools that may help the design of new identification pipelines. Second, the huge increase of sequence production capacities requires to use the most efficient data structures and algorithms to scale up tools in front of the data deluge. This paper provides an up-to-date glimpse on the art of string indexing and string matching. Third, there exists a growing knowledge on the architecture of mobile elements built from literature and the analysis of results generated by these pipelines. Besides data management which has led to the discovery of new families or new elements of a family, the community has an increasing need in knowledge management tools in order to compare, validate, or simply keep trace of mobile element models. We end the paper with first considerations on what could help the near future of such research on models.

Key words

Repeats Seeds String index Pattern matching DNA parsing Grammatical models 

References

  1. 1.
    Jurka J, et al. (2005) Repbase Update, a database of eukaryotic repetitive elements. Cyt Gen Res. 110:462–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Flutre T., et al. (2011) Considering transposable element diversification in de novo annotation approaches. PLoS ONE. 6:1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Reinert G, Schbath S, Waterman MS (2005) Probabilistic and Statistical Properties of Finite Words in Finite Sequences. J Berstel and D Perrin (eds.). In Applied Combinatorics on Words. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ussery D, Wassenaar T, Borini S (2009) Word Frequencies and Repeats. Computing for Comparative Microbial Genomics: Bioinformatics for Microbiologists. Computational Biology. s.l.: Springer. 2009, Chapters 7 and 8, pp. 111–150Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lefebvre A, Lecroq T, Alexandre J (2003) An improved algorithm for finding longest repeats with a modified factor oracle. Journal of Automata, Languages and Combinatorics 8:347–658Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lefebvre A, et al. (2003) FORRepeats: detects repeats on entire chromosomes and between genomes. Bioinformatics 19:319–326PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Crochemore M, Ilie L, Rytter W (2009) Repetitions in strings: algorithms and combinatorics. Theoret Comput Sci 410(50):5227–5235Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Manber U, Myers G (1990) Suffix arrays: A new method for on-line string searches. In Proceedings of the 1st ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms. Ed. Edited Dana Randall, pp. 319–327Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Puglisi SJ, Smyth WF, Turpin AH (2007) A taxonomy of suffix array construction algorithms. ACM Comput. Surv 39:1–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Abouelhoda MI, Kurtz S, Ohlebusch E (2004) Replacing suffix trees with enhanced suffix arrays. J Disc Algo 4:53–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pokrzywa R, Polanski A (2010) BWtrs: A tool for searching for tandem repeats in DNA sequences based on the Burrows-Wheeler transform. Genomics 96:316–321Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nong G, Zhang S, Chan W. (2009) Linear Suffix Array Construction by Almost Pure Induced-Sorting, Proceedings of 19th IEEE Data Compression Conference (IEEE DCC). Mar. 2009, Snowbird, UT, USA, pp. 193–202Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Homann R, et al. (2009) mkESA: enhanced suffix array construction tool. Bioinformatics. 25:1084–1085PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schnattinger T, Ohlebusch E, Gog S (2010) Bidirectional search in a string with wavelet trees. In Proceedings of the 21st annual conference on Combinatorial pattern matching (CPM’10). Amihood Amir and Laxmi Parida (Eds.). Springer-Verlag. pp. 40–50Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Price AL, Jones NC, Pevzner PA (2005) De novo identification of repeat families in large genomes. Proceedings of the 13th Annual International conference on Intelligent Systems for Molecular Biology (ISMB-05). Detroit, MichiganGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Li R, et al. (2005) ReAS: Recovery of ancestral sequences for transposable elements from the unassembled reads of a whole genome shotgun. PLoS Comput 1:4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Noe L, Kucherov G (2005) YASS: enhancing the sensitivity of DNA similarity search. Nucl Acids Res 33: 540-W543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kucherov G, Noe L, Roytberg M (2006) A unifying framework for seed sensitivity and its application to subset seeds. J. Bioinf Comp Biol 4:553–569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nguyen VH, Lavenier D (2009) PLAST: parallel local alignment search tool for database comparison BMC Bioinformatics 10:329Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kiełbasa SM, et al. (2011) Adaptive seeds tame genomic sequence comparison. Genome Res 21:487–493PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Krumsiek J, et al. (2007) A rapid and sensitive tool for creating dotplots on genome scale. Bioinformatics 23:1026–1028PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Durand P, et al. (2006) Browsing repeats in genomes: Pygram and an application to non-coding region analysis. BMC Bioinformatics 7:477PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sokol D, Atagun F (2010) TRedD: A database for tandem repeats over the edit distance. Database: article ID baq003Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Krzywinski M, et al. (2009) Circos: an information aesthetic for comparative genomics. Gen Res 19:1639–1645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tempel S, et al. (2010) ModuleOrganizer: detecting modules in families of transposable elements. BMC Bioinformatics 11:474PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Belleannée C, Nicolas J (2007) Logol: Modelling evolving sequence families through a dedicated constrained string language. Inria Research report RR-6350:19Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Li M, et al. (2004) Highly sensitive and fast homology search. J Bioinform Comput Biol 2:417–439PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Weber MJ (2006) Mammalian Small Nucleolar RNAs Are Mobile Genetic Elements PLoS Genet 2:e205Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Grzebelus D, et al. (2007) Diversity and structure of PIF/Harbinger-like elements in the genome of Medicago truncatula. BMC Genomics 8:409PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Roytberg M, et al. (2009) On Subset Seeds for Protein Alignment. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics. 6:483–494PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hughes JF, et al. (2010) Chimpanzee and human Y chromosomes are remarkably divergent in structure gene content. Nature 463:536–539PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Rousseau C, et al. (2009) CRISPI: a CRISPR interactive database. Bioinformatics 25:3317–3318.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Brudno M, et al. (2007) Multiple whole genome alignments and novel biomedical applications at the VISTA portal. Nucl Acids Res 35:W669-W674PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Nix DA, Eisen MB (2005) GATA: a graphic alignment tool for comparative sequence analysis. BMC Bioinformatics 6:9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Darzentas N (2010) Circoletto: visualizing sequence similarity with Circos. Bioinformatics 26:2620–2621PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Tempel S, et al. (2006) Domain organization within repeated DNA sequences: application to the study of a family of transposable elements. Bioinformatics. 22:1948–1954PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Feschotte C, et al. (2009) Exploring repetitive DNA landscapes using REPCLASS, a tool that automates the classification of transposable elements in eukaryotic genomes. Gen Biol Evol 1:205–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Estill JC, Bennetzen JL (2009) The DAWGPAWS pipeline for the annotation of genes and transposable elements in plant genomes. Plant Met 5:8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Han Y, Wessler SR (2010) MITE-Hunter: a program for discovering miniature inverted-repeat transposable elements from genomic sequences. Nucl Acids Res 38:e199PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kurtz S (2011) The Vmatch large scale sequence analysis software. A Manual. Unpublished report. Center for Bioinformatics Univ. of Hamburg, http://www.vmatch.de/virtman.pdf; + 2 other manuals “Chaining pairwise matches using the program chain2dim. Manual” and “Clustering Matches using the program matchcluster. Manual”
  41. 41.
    Morgante M, et al. (2005) A Structured motifs search. J Comput Biol. 12:1065–1082.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Zhang Y, Zaki MJ (2006) SMOTIF: efficient structured pattern and profile motif search. Algorithms Mol Biol 21:1–22Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Ellinghaus D, Kurtz S, Willhoeft U (2008) LTRharvest, an efficient and flexible software for de novo detection of LTR retrotransposons. BMC Bioinformatics 9:18PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Searls DB (1993) String variable grammar: a logic grammar formalism for the biological language of DNA. J Logic Program 24:73–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Searls DB (2002) The language of genes. Nature 420:211–217PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Nicolas J et al. (2005) Suffix-tree analyser (STAN): looking for nucleotidic and peptidic patterns in chromosomes. Bioinformatics 21:4408–4410PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.IRISA, INRIA centre de recherche Rennes-Bretagne AtlantiqueRennes CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations