Back

Embedding the de Bruijn graph, and applications to metagenomics

Menegaux, R.; Vert, J.-P.

2020-03-08 bioinformatics
10.1101/2020.03.06.980979 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Fast mapping of sequencing reads to taxonomic clades is a crucial step in metagenomics, which however raises computational challenges as the numbers of reads and of taxonomic clades increases. Besides alignment-based methods, which are accurate but computational costly, faster compositional approaches have recently been proposed to predict the taxonomic clade of a read based on the set of k-mers it contains. Machine learning-based compositional approaches, in particular, have recently reached accuracies similar to alignment-based models, while being considerably faster. It has been observed that the accuracy of these models increases with the length k of the k-mers they use, however existing methods are limited to handle k-mers of lengths up to k = 12 or 13 because of their large memory footprint needed to store the model coefficients for each possible k-mer. In order to explore the performance of machine learning-based compositional approaches for longer k-mers than currently possible, we propose to reduce the memory footprint of these methods by binning together k-mers that appear together in the sequencing reads used to train the models. We achieve this binning by learning a vector embedding for the vertices of a compacted de Bruijn graph, allowing us to embed any DNA sequence in a low-dimensional vector space where a machine learning system can be trained. The resulting method, which we call Brume, allows us to train compositional machine learning-based models with k-mers of length up to k = 31. We show on two metagenomics benchmark that Brume reaches better performance than previously achieved, thanks to the use of longer k-mers.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.