Back

Data-driven design of LNA-blockers for efficient contaminant removal in Ribo-seq libraries

Ricciardi, D. A.; Peter, F. E.; Böhmer, M.

2025-09-16 molecular biology
10.1101/2025.09.11.675547 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Ribo-Seq libraries often contain a high amount of non-coding RNA fragments, which can significantly reduce the information output of these experiments. Contaminants can comprise up to 90% of a Ribo-Seq library, showing high sequence variability and diverse fragmentation, which hinders the effectiveness of rRNA depletion kits with fixed target sequences. We developed a workflow to identify experiment-specific contaminants from a small-scale, preliminary sequencing run. This enables the design of locked nucleic acid (LNA) oligonucleotides that target the contaminating fragments, thereby preventing their amplification during library preparation. This process requires only a single pipetting step and no additional purification. In a proof-of-concept experiment, just five LNAs reduced contaminating fragments by over 30 %, doubling the amount of useful sequencing data from Ribo-Seq experiments. We offer a script to identify and visualize contaminants and optimized target sequences, along with guidelines for designing custom LNA sets and a collection of predesigned LNAs for Arabidopsis thaliana across various common growth conditions, serving as a foundation for a public LNA repository. Significance StatementRibo-Seq libraries often contain abundant non-coding RNA contaminants, which, because of their high sequence variability and diverse fragmentation, are challenging to remove. We present a computational pipeline that identifies experiment-specific target sequences and allows for their efficient depletion using custom LNA probes in a single pipetting step, thereby increasing sequencing yield and reducing costs. A public LNA repository will support sharing validated targets within the research community.

Published in Scientific Reports (predicted rank #17) · training set

Matching journals

The top 6 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.