splicing-qc

name	splicing-qc
description	Assesses RNA-seq data quality specifically for alternative splicing analysis. QC layers include experimental design audit (library prep, read length, depth, replicates), STAR 2-pass cohort-style alignment, junction saturation curves and discovery plateau detection, novel-vs-known junction ratio diagnostics, junction-overhang distribution, splice-site strength scoring (MaxEntScan intrinsic + SpliceAI context-aware), strandedness verification, GENCODE basic vs comprehensive choice, and rRNA contamination screening. Splicing analysis is more demanding than DGE on read length, depth, library prep, alignment strategy, and annotation choice — failures silently bias PSI estimates and inflate novel-junction false positives. Use when evaluating data suitability for splicing analysis, troubleshooting low event detection, or designing sequencing experiments where AS is a primary endpoint.
tool_type	python
primary_tool	RSeQC

Version Compatibility

Reference examples tested with: RSeQC 5.0+, STAR 2.7.11+, samtools 1.19+, pysam 0.22+, regtools 1.0+, maxentpy 0.0.1+, spliceai 1.3+, matplotlib 3.8+, pandas 2.2+

Before using code patterns, verify installed versions match. If versions differ:

• Python: pip show <package> then help(module.function) to check signatures
• CLI: <tool> --version then <tool> --help to confirm flags

If code throws ImportError, AttributeError, or TypeError, introspect the installed package and adapt the example to match the actual API rather than retrying.

Splicing-Specific Quality Control

Splicing analysis is more demanding than DGE on read length, depth, library prep, alignment strategy, and annotation choice. Failures in any of these silently bias PSI estimates and inflate novel-junction false positives. The decision sequence is: experimental design -> library prep -> alignment strategy -> annotation -> diagnostic metrics. Each layer's failure mode is distinct.

QC Layer Taxonomy

Layer	Target	Tool	Fails when
Experimental design	Read length, depth, replicates, library type	Pre-sequencing review	<PE 75nt; n<3 vs n<3; <30M reads/sample
Library prep	poly(A) vs rRNA depletion	Pre-sequencing review	poly(A) library used for IR analysis
Alignment	STAR 2-pass cohort-style	STAR	1-pass loses 14% novel junctions; per-sample 2-pass introduces inconsistency
Junction discovery	Saturation, novelty	RSeQC junction_saturation, junction_annotation	Curve still rising = under-sequenced; novel% >40% suggests biology or artifact
Strand specificity	Library protocol consistency	RSeQC infer_experiment	Wrong --libType halves usable junctions
Splice site strength	Cryptic vs canonical	MaxEntScan, SpliceAI	Weak splice sites (MaxEnt<5) may indicate cryptic, regulated, or annotation error
Junction overhang	Read-junction support quality	pysam CIGAR parsing	Overhang <8nt = high false-positive rate
Contamination	rRNA, adapters	fastq_screen	>20% rRNA in "depleted" library = failed depletion
Annotation	GENCODE basic vs comprehensive	Annotation choice	Basic for canonical events; comprehensive for DTU

Decision Tree by Question

Question	Recommended QC
Will my planned RNA-seq design support AS analysis?	Pre-sequencing audit: library type, read length, depth, replicates
Is my data suitable for cassette exon analysis?	Junction saturation + known/novel ratio + read length
Why does my AS analysis call so few events?	Saturation curve, depth, library type, alignment 2-pass
Why does my AS analysis call so many novel junctions?	Annotation completeness + novel% + biology check (TDP-43, SF3B1)
Are my SpliceAI predictions calibrated for my tissue?	MaxEntScan + SpliceAI concordance for known sites
Did STAR 2-pass actually run cohort-style?	Verify SJ.out.tab merging across samples
Is intron retention detectable in my data?	Library type (must be rRNA-depleted); strand-specific
Are my microexons detectable?	Read length >=100; aligner anchor settings; consider VAST-TOOLS

Experimental Design Audit (Before Sequencing)

Decision	For splicing analysis	Rationale
Library prep	rRNA depletion (Ribo-Zero, RiboCop)	poly(A) selection loses pre-mRNA, nascent transcripts, and detained introns; for IR analysis rRNA depletion is mandatory (Sims 2014 Genome Res)
Read length	PE 100-150 nt (PE 150 strongly preferred)	Junction-spanning reads need >=8 nt overhang on each exon; 50 nt SE biases toward shorter exons (Wang 2008 Nature)
Pairing	Paired-end	Single-end loses fragment-level disambiguation of junctions
Depth	50-100M reads/sample	DGE-grade 30M misses low-PSI events; 100M for low-abundance event discovery
Strandedness	Stranded library (Illumina TruSeq stranded)	Distinguishes overlapping antisense; some tools double-count unstranded junctions
Replicates	n>=3 per condition	n=2 vs n=2 has poor calibration in most tools (especially SUPPA2)
Annotation	GENCODE basic for canonical, comprehensive for DTU/discovery	basic = high-confidence; comprehensive includes putative — affects FDR control
Microexons	PE 100+ with --alignSJoverhangMin 8; VAST-TOOLS	Default aligners miss 3-27nt exons
Long-intron genes (TTN, brain)	Increased --alignIntronMax	Default 1Mb may miss >1Mb introns

STAR 2-Pass Alignment

Goal: Maximize novel-junction sensitivity for downstream AS analysis.

Approach: Run STAR once per sample to discover novel junctions (pass 1), merge novel junctions across cohort, then re-align with the augmented junction set (pass 2). Cohort-style 2-pass beats per-sample basic 2-pass for differential splicing because all samples use the same junction reference.

# Pass 1: per-sample
STAR --runMode alignReads \
    --runThreadN 8 \
    --genomeDir genome_index \
    --sjdbGTFfile gencode.v45.basic.gtf \
    --sjdbOverhang 149 \
    --readFilesIn sample_R1.fq.gz sample_R2.fq.gz \
    --readFilesCommand zcat \
    --outSAMtype BAM SortedByCoordinate \
    --outFileNamePrefix pass1_${sample}_ \
    --outSJtype Standard \
    --outFilterMultimapNmax 20 \
    --alignSJoverhangMin 8 \
    --alignSJDBoverhangMin 1

# Cohort-style 2-pass: collect all SJ.out.tab from pass 1
cat pass1_*_SJ.out.tab | awk '$5 > 0 && $7 >= 3' | sort -u > cohort_novel_SJ.tab

# Pass 2: re-align with augmented junctions
STAR --runMode alignReads \
    --runThreadN 8 \
    --genomeDir genome_index \
    --sjdbGTFfile gencode.v45.basic.gtf \
    --sjdbFileChrStartEnd cohort_novel_SJ.tab \
    --sjdbOverhang 149 \
    --readFilesIn sample_R1.fq.gz sample_R2.fq.gz \
    --readFilesCommand zcat \
    --outSAMtype BAM SortedByCoordinate \
    --outFileNamePrefix pass2_${sample}_ \
    --outSJtype Standard \
    --twopassMode None \
    --quantMode GeneCounts \
    --alignSJoverhangMin 8 \
    --alignSJDBoverhangMin 3

Approach	Novel-junction recovery	Cohort consistency
1-pass with annotation	~80-86% (depends on GENCODE completeness)	High (annotation-based)
Per-sample basic 2-pass (--twopassMode Basic)	>=94%	Variable (each sample has its own junction set)
Cohort-style 2-pass (manual merge)	>=94%	High (shared junction reference)

Per-sample 2-pass (--twopassMode Basic) is simpler but produces inconsistent junction sets across samples; for differential splicing the cohort-style version is preferred (Veeneman 2016 Bioinformatics).

The pass-1 filter awk '$5 > 0 && $7 >= 3' keeps junctions with strand info AND >=3 unique reads — adjust threshold to balance discovery vs noise.

Junction Saturation

Goal: Determine whether sequencing depth is sufficient for comprehensive splicing detection.

Approach: Run RSeQC junction saturation; check whether the discovery curve plateaus.

junction_saturation.py \
    -i sample.bam \
    -r gencode_v45.bed \
    -o sample_junc_sat \
    -m 50 \
    -v 100000

import subprocess
import pandas as pd

samples = ['s1.bam', 's2.bam', 's3.bam']
for sample in samples:
    subprocess.run([
        'junction_saturation.py',
        '-i', sample,
        '-r', 'gencode_v45.bed',
        '-o', sample.replace('.bam', '_junc_sat')
    ], check=True)

The output *.junctionSaturation_plot.r plots known + novel junctions vs subsampled reads.

Plateau detection rule: if from 80% to 100% of reads, the junction count rises by <2%, consider it plateaued. Still rising means more sequencing would yield more junctions.

For AS analysis, plateau on the known junction curve is the requirement; novel-junction curves often don't plateau even at deep coverage (which is biologically informative — novel junctions are inherently rarer events).

Novel-vs-Known Junction Ratio

Goal: Detect annotation/mapping issues or biologically interesting cryptic splicing.

Approach: Classify junctions with RSeQC and compute the novel:known ratio.

junction_annotation.py -i sample.bam -r gencode_v45.bed -o sample_junc_annot

import pandas as pd

junc = pd.read_csv('sample_junc_annot.junction.xls', sep='\t')
total = junc['total_splicing_events'].sum()

by_class = junc.groupby('annotation')['total_splicing_events'].sum()
known_frac = by_class.get('known', 0) / total
novel_frac = (by_class.get('partial_novel', 0) + by_class.get('novel', 0)) / total

print(f'known: {known_frac:.1%}, novel: {novel_frac:.1%}')

Known fraction	Status	Interpretation
>=80%	Healthy	Comprehensive annotation, good alignment
60-80%	Acceptable	Check annotation completeness or organism
<60%	Suspect or interesting	Mapping artifacts, contamination, OR biologically informative

High novel-junction rate may be biology, not artifact:

• TDP-43 loss (ALS/FTD post-mortem brain): cryptic exon de-repression in UNC13A, STMN2, ATG4B (Brown 2022 Nature; Klim 2019 Nat Neurosci)
• SF3B1-mutant cancer (MDS, CLL, uveal melanoma): cryptic 3'ss ~10-30nt upstream of canonical (Darman 2015 Cell Rep)
• Non-model organism: GENCODE-grade annotation unavailable; novel junctions reflect annotation gaps not biology
• Microbial / viral contamination: reads aligning to host but with unusual junctions

If novel% >40%, drill down: check organism, check spliceosomal mutation status, check known disease signatures.

Junction Read Overhang and Coverage

Goal: Profile per-junction read counts and overhang distribution to identify weakly-supported events.

Approach: Parse CIGAR for N (intron) operations; tally per-junction reads and minimum exon overhangs.

import pysam
from collections import defaultdict

def junction_stats(bam_path):
    bam = pysam.AlignmentFile(bam_path, 'rb')
    counts = defaultdict(int)
    min_overhang = defaultdict(lambda: float('inf'))

    for read in bam.fetch():
        if read.is_unmapped or read.is_secondary:
            continue
        ref_pos = read.reference_start
        cumulative_query = 0
        cigar = read.cigartuples
        for i, (op, length) in enumerate(cigar):
            if op == 3:
                left_match = sum(l for o, l in cigar[:i] if o in (0, 7, 8))
                right_match = sum(l for o, l in cigar[i+1:] if o in (0, 7, 8))
                overhang = min(left_match, right_match)
                key = (read.reference_name, ref_pos, ref_pos + length)
                counts[key] += 1
                min_overhang[key] = min(min_overhang[key], overhang)
            if op in (0, 2, 3, 7, 8):
                ref_pos += length

    bam.close()
    return counts, dict(min_overhang)

counts, overhang = junction_stats('sample.bam')
print(f'total junctions: {len(counts)}')
print(f'>= 10 reads: {sum(1 for c in counts.values() if c >= 10)}')
print(f'overhang >= 8 nt: {sum(1 for k, c in counts.items() if overhang[k] >= 8)}')

Junction reads with overhang <8 nt are common false positives, especially for novel sites. Most callers default to >=8 nt anchor for this reason. Microexon-aware aligners use overhang as low as 6 nt with explicit configuration.

Splice Site Strength (MaxEntScan and SpliceAI)

Goal: Score donor and acceptor splice sites to flag weak / cryptic sites and to predict variant impact on splicing.

Approach: Use MaxEntScan (sequence information content) and SpliceAI (context-aware deep-learning) — they answer different questions.

from maxentpy.maxent import score5, score3

donor = 'CAGGTAAGT'
acceptor = 'TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCAG'
print(f"5'ss MaxEnt: {score5(donor):.2f}")
print(f"3'ss MaxEnt: {score3(acceptor):.2f}")

Score	Interpretation	Source
5'ss MaxEnt > 8	Strong donor	Yeo & Burge 2004 J Comput Biol
5'ss MaxEnt 5-8	Moderate
5'ss MaxEnt < 5	Weak / cryptic
3'ss MaxEnt > 8	Strong acceptor
3'ss MaxEnt < 5	Weak / cryptic
SpliceAI delta > 0.2	PP3 supporting (ClinGen SVI 2023)	Walker 2023 AJHG
SpliceAI delta > 0.5	PP3 moderate
SpliceAI delta > 0.8	PP3 strong

MaxEntScan vs SpliceAI:

• MaxEntScan scores sequence information content (intrinsic strength). Captures position-wise dependencies at the consensus.
• SpliceAI predicts in-vivo usage probability given full pre-mRNA context (10 kb window).
• A position with high MaxEnt but low SpliceAI is intrinsically strong but contextually silenced (chromatin, trans factors).
• A position with low MaxEnt but high SpliceAI is intrinsically weak but contextually used (enhancer-driven, e.g. weak donors stabilized by ESEs).
• Report both for variant interpretation; for variant impact see splice-variant-prediction.

Picard CollectRnaSeqMetrics and Gene-Body Coverage

Goal: Get integrated RNA-seq QC including intronic / exonic / intergenic mapping rates and gene-body coverage uniformity.

Approach: Run picard CollectRnaSeqMetrics for mapping distribution; RSeQC geneBody_coverage.py for 5'-3' bias.

picard CollectRnaSeqMetrics \
    I=sample.bam \
    O=sample.rna_metrics.txt \
    REF_FLAT=refFlat.txt \
    STRAND_SPECIFICITY=SECOND_READ_TRANSCRIPTION_STRAND \
    RIBOSOMAL_INTERVALS=rRNA_intervals.interval_list

# Strandedness conversion (foot-gun):
# Reverse-stranded (Illumina TruSeq Stranded; NEB Ultra II Directional — both dUTP):
#   rMATS  --libType fr-firststrand
#   featureCounts -s 2
#   Picard STRAND_SPECIFICITY=SECOND_READ_TRANSCRIPTION_STRAND
# Forward-stranded (Lexogen QuantSeq FWD, certain ligation-based kits):
#   rMATS  --libType fr-secondstrand
#   featureCounts -s 1
#   Picard STRAND_SPECIFICITY=FIRST_READ_TRANSCRIPTION_STRAND
# STAR has no library-strand flag; pass --outSAMstrandField intronMotif
# (works for any library) so downstream tools can read XS tags.

geneBody_coverage.py \
    -i sample.bam \
    -r gencode_v45.bed \
    -o sample_geneBody

Metric	Healthy	Concerning
PCT_CODING_BASES	>=50%	<30% (suggests degradation or mis-priming)
PCT_UTR_BASES	20-40%	>>50% (3' bias)
PCT_INTRONIC_BASES	<30% (poly(A)); <60% (rRNA-depleted)	>50% (poly(A)) suggests pre-mRNA contamination
PCT_INTERGENIC_BASES	<10%	>20% (genomic DNA contamination)
MEDIAN_5PRIME_TO_3PRIME_BIAS	0.7-1.3	>2 or <0.5 (severe degradation)
Gene body coverage curve	Flat	Strong 3' skew = RIN low or library mis-prep

3' bias (degraded RNA) directly reduces splicing-event detection because junction reads scatter across the gene body; with 3' bias they concentrate near the 3' end and miss CDS junctions.

Strandedness Verification

infer_experiment.py -i sample.bam -r gencode_v45.bed -s 200000

Output reports the fraction of reads consistent with each library type:

Output pattern	Library type	rMATS --libType
~50% / ~50%	Unstranded	fr-unstranded
>=90% "++ , --"	Forward-stranded	fr-secondstrand
>=90% "+- , -+"	Reverse-stranded (Illumina TruSeq stranded)	fr-firststrand

Wrong strand setting halves usable junction reads — always verify before quantification. RSeQC infer_experiment.py is fast and authoritative.

Annotation Choice

GENCODE level	Contents	Use for
Basic	High-confidence canonical isoforms	Standard rMATS, leafcutter, SUPPA2
Comprehensive	All transcripts including putative/predicted	DTU pipelines (DRIMSeq+DEXSeq, satuRn), isoform discovery
RefSeq	NCBI curated	Less complete than GENCODE; legacy use
Ensembl	Same content as GENCODE in vertebrates	Different attribute conventions

Comprehensive captures more biology but inflates DTU multiple-testing burden and includes annotation noise. For event-level (rMATS) AS, basic is usually adequate; for transcript-level DTU (DRIMSeq, satuRn), comprehensive may be necessary to capture rare isoforms.

rRNA Contamination Check

fastq_screen --conf fastq_screen.conf --threads 8 sample_R1.fq.gz

Or post-alignment:

samtools view -c sample.bam | awk '{print "total:",$0}'
samtools view -c -L rRNA_intervals.bed sample.bam | awk '{print "rRNA:",$0}'

rRNA fraction	Library type	Status
>=20%	"depleted"	Failed depletion; redo
5-20%	"depleted"	Acceptable; some rRNA leakage
<5%	poly(A)	Healthy
<5%	"depleted"	Excellent depletion
1-3%	poly(A)	Suggests RNA degradation

5% rRNA in a poly(A) library suggests degraded RNA; >20% in a "depleted" library indicates failed depletion.

Per-Tool Failure Modes

RSeQC junction_saturation: Subsampling Behavior

Trigger: Running on extremely deep BAM (>200M reads).

Mechanism: RSeQC subsamples at 5%, 10%, ..., 100%; with very deep BAMs, the early subsamples are still tens of millions of reads, masking saturation behavior.

Symptom: Curve appears flat throughout; uninformative.

Fix: Subsample BAM with samtools view -s 0.1 before running junction_saturation; or use -s flag to set custom step intervals.

STAR 2-Pass: Per-Sample Inconsistency

Trigger: Using --twopassMode Basic on differential splicing cohorts.

Mechanism: Per-sample 2-pass means each sample has its own SJ.out.tab; samples may differ in which novel junctions they re-align against.

Symptom: Inconsistent novel junction calls across replicates; rMATS --novelSS differential calls don't replicate.

Fix: Switch to cohort-style 2-pass (collect all pass-1 SJ.out.tabs, merge, re-align all samples with merged set).

MaxEntScan: Out-of-Range Sequences

Trigger: Sequences with N bases or wrong length.

Mechanism: score5 expects exactly 9 nt (3 exon + 6 intron); score3 expects 23 nt (20 intron + 3 exon).

Symptom: ValueError or silently incorrect score.

Fix: Pre-validate sequence length and N-content; use a wrapper that returns NaN for invalid inputs.

SpliceAI: TensorFlow Memory

Trigger: Running spliceai on large VCF without GPU.

Mechanism: TensorFlow CPU mode is slow; default batch size may exceed memory.

Symptom: OOM kill; very slow runtime (hours per chromosome).

Fix: Use -D 50 for screening (fastest); split VCF by chromosome; use GPU when available.

infer_experiment.py: Sample Size

Trigger: Running on very low-coverage region or small subsample (-s).

Mechanism: Default sample size is 200,000 reads; with low coverage, this isn't met.

Symptom: "0 of 200000 reads" output; cannot infer strand.

Fix: Lower -s to actual available reads; or use -q 30 to filter by quality.

Common Errors

Error	Cause	Solution
STAR: SJDBoverhang differs from genome	Index built with different overhang than current run	Rebuild index with --sjdbOverhang matching read length - 1
RSeQC: BED format error	Annotation BED has wrong column order	Convert with awk or bedtools
MaxEntScan: invalid sequence character N	N in input	Filter or replace; document
samtools view: missing index	BAM not indexed	samtools index sample.bam
STAR: too many SJs in cohort merge	Cohort SJ.out.tab too large after merge	Filter to junctions in >=3 samples or with >=3 unique reads
regtools: invalid CIGAR	Non-spec read in BAM	Filter with samtools view -h -F 0x100 -F 0x800

Quality Thresholds

Metric	Good	Acceptable	Poor	Source
Read length (PE)	150 nt	100 nt	<75 nt	Wang 2008 Nature
Sequencing depth	>=100M	50-100M	<30M	DGE-grade insufficient
Junction saturation	Plateau (<2% growth in last 20%)	Near plateau	Still rising	RSeQC convention
Known-junction fraction	>=80%	60-80%	<60% (suspect or interesting)	RSeQC convention
Junctions >=10 reads	>=50%	30-50%	<30%	rMATS reliability cutoff
5'ss / 3'ss MaxEnt	>8	5-8	<5	Yeo & Burge 2004
Strandedness	>90% one direction	70-90%	<70%	RSeQC convention
rRNA in depleted library	<5%	5-20%	>20%	Sims 2014 Genome Res
2-pass STAR	Cohort-style	Per-sample basic	1-pass only	Veeneman 2016 Bioinformatics

Troubleshooting Low Event Detection

Issue	Possible causes	Solutions
Few events called	Low depth; short reads; SE; wrong strand	Increase depth; use PE150; verify libType
High novel junctions	Annotation gaps; mapping artifacts; biology (TDP-43, SF3B1)	Update annotation; check 2-pass; consider biology
Low IR detection	poly(A) library	Use rRNA depletion
Microexons missing	Default aligner anchors too long	VAST-TOOLS, MicroExonator, or long-read
Many weak splice sites	Cryptic splicing	Validate with MaxEnt + SpliceAI; consider RNA-seq from secondary tissue
FDR uncalibrated at low n	n=2 vs n=2	Use leafcutter or Shiba; avoid SUPPA2 alone
PSI variance high across replicates	Library prep / RIN inconsistency	Check RIN; consider RNA degradation
Sashimi plot mismatch with PSI	Junction-imbalance bias in rMATS	Run Shiba; or filter by overhang distribution

Common Pitfalls

• Skipping STAR 2-pass — loses ~14% of novel junctions; matters for any non-canonical organism or condition.
• Per-sample 2-pass instead of cohort-style — produces inconsistent junction sets; differential splicing calls don't replicate.
• poly(A) library for IR analysis — biases toward mature transcripts; depletes pre-mRNA / nascent / detained intron signal.
• PE 50nt single-end — junction-spanning reads need >=8nt overhang on both sides; biases toward shorter exons.
• Wrong --libType — halves usable junctions; always verify with infer_experiment.py.
• Using basic GENCODE for DTU — basic excludes putative/rare isoforms; DTU pipelines may underdetect.
• Using MaxEntScan alone for variant interpretation — misses context-dependent regulation; pair with SpliceAI.
• Treating high novel% as artifact reflexively — could be biology (TDP-43, SF3B1, non-model organism); investigate.

Related Skills

• splicing-quantification - PSI estimation after QC passes
• read-alignment/star-alignment - STAR 2-pass detail and parameter tuning
• read-qc/quality-reports - General sequencing QC (FastQC, MultiQC)
• read-qc/contamination-screening - rRNA / adapter / cross-species contamination
• splice-variant-prediction - SpliceAI / Pangolin for variant impact
• long-read-splicing - When short-read QC is fundamentally limiting (microexons, complex isoforms)
• differential-splicing - Downstream tool that requires QC pass

References

• Yeo & Burge 2004 J Comput Biol - MaxEntScan
• Jaganathan et al 2019 Cell - SpliceAI
• Walker et al 2023 Am J Hum Genet - ClinGen SVI splicing thresholds
• Veeneman et al 2016 Bioinformatics - STAR 2-pass benchmark
• Wang et al 2008 Nature - PE 75+ recommendation for AS
• Sims et al 2014 Genome Res - rRNA depletion vs poly(A) for AS
• Brown et al 2022 Nature - cryptic exons in TDP-43 loss
• Klim et al 2019 Nat Neurosci - STMN2 cryptic splicing in ALS
• Darman et al 2015 Cell Rep - SF3B1 cryptic 3'ss
• Wang et al 2024 Nat Protoc - rMATS-turbo
• Dobin et al 2013 Bioinformatics - STAR aligner