Content area

Abstract

Pooled sequencing-based fitness assays are a powerful and widely used approach to quantifying fitness of thousands of genetic variants in parallel. Despite the throughput of such assays, they are prone to biases in fitness estimates, and errors in measurements are typically larger for deleterious fitness effects, relative to neutral effects. In practice, designing pooled fitness assays involves tradeoffs between the number of timepoints, the sequencing depth, and other parameters to gain as much information as possible within a feasible experiment. Here, we combined simulations and reanalysis of an existing experimental dataset to explore how assay parameters impact measurements of near-neutral and deleterious fitness effects using a standard fitness estimator. We found that sequencing multiple timepoints at relatively modest depth improved estimates of near-neutral fitness effects, but systematically biased measurements of deleterious effects. We showed that a fixed total number of reads, deeper sequencing at fewer timepoints improved resolution of deleterious fitness effects. Our results highlight a tradeoff between measurement of deleterious and near-neutral effect sizes for a fixed amount of data and suggest that fitness assay design should be tuned for fitness effects that are relevant to the specific biological question.

Details

Title
Resolving Deleterious and Near-Neutral Effects Requires Different Pooled Fitness Assay Designs
Author
Limdi, Anurag 1 ; Baym, Michael 1   VIAFID ORCID Logo 

 Harvard Medical School, Department of Biomedical Informatics and Laboratory of Systems Pharmacology, Boston, USA (GRID:grid.38142.3c) (ISNI:000000041936754X) 
Pages
325-333
Publication year
2023
Publication date
Jun 2023
Publisher
Springer Nature B.V.
ISSN
0022-2844
e-ISSN
1432-1432
Source type
Scholarly Journal
Language of publication
English
ProQuest document ID
2827001405
Copyright
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2023. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.