POL Scientific / JBM / Volume 4 / Issue 1 / DOI: 10.14440/jbm.2017.153
Cite this article
22
Citations
56
Views
Journal Browser
Volume | Year
Issue
Search
News and Announcements
View All
ARTICLE

Using cluster edge counting to aggregate iterations of centroid-linkage clustering results and avoid large distance matrices

Matthew Kellom1 Jason Raymond1
Show Less
1 School of Earth and Space Exploration, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287-6004 USA
JBM 2017 , 4(1), 1;
Published: 16 March 2017
© 2017 by the author. Licensee POL Scientific, USA. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ )
Abstract

Sequence clustering is a fundamental tool of molecular biology that is being challenged by increasing dataset sizes from high-throughput sequencing. The agglomerative algorithms that have been relied upon for their accuracy require the construction of computationally costly distance matrices which can overwhelm basic research personal computers. Alternative algorithms exist, such as centroid-linkage, to circumvent large memory requirements but their results are often input-order dependent. We present a method for bootstrapping the results of many centroid-linkage clustering iterations into an aggregate set of clusters, increasing cluster accuracy without a distance matrix. This method ranks cluster edges by conservation across iterations and reconstructs aggregate clusters from the resulting ranked edge list, pruning out low-frequency cluster edges that may have been a result of a specific sequence input order. Aggregating centroid-linkage clustering iterations can help researchers using basic research personal computers acquire more reliable clustering results without increasing memory resources.

Keywords
clustering
cluster
centroid-linkage
distance matrix
aggregate
References

1. Larkin MA, Blackshields G, Brown NP, Chenna R, McGettigan PA, McWilliam H, et al. Clustal W and Clustal X version 2.0. Bioinformatics. 2007 Nov 1;23(21):2947–8.
2. Gronau I, Moran S. Optimal implementations of UPGMA and other common clustering algorithms. Information Processing Letters. 2007 Dec 16;104(6):205–10.
3. Cole JR, Wang Q, Cardenas E, Fish J, Chai B, Farris RJ, et al. The Ribosomal Database Project: improved alignments and new tools for rRNA analysis. Nucl Acids Res. 2009 Jan 1;37(suppl 1):D141–5.
4. Huse SM, Welch DM, Morrison HG, Sogin ML. Ironing out the wrinkles in the rare biosphere through improved OTU clustering. Environmental Microbiology. 2010 Jul 1;12(7):1889–98.
5. Edgar RC. Search and clustering orders of magnitude faster than BLAST. Bioinformatics.2010 Oct 1;26(19):2460–1.
6. Kellom M, Raymond J. Using dendritic heat maps to simultaneously display genotype divergence with phenotype divergence. 2016 Aug 18;11(8):e0161292.
7. Fu L, Niu B, Zhu Z, Wu S, Li W. CD-HIT: accelerated for clustering the next-generation sequencing data. Bioinformatics. 2012 Dec 1;28(23):3150–2.
8. Ghodsi M, Liu B, Pop M. DNACLUST: accurate and efficient clustering of phylogenetic marker genes. 2011 Jan 5;12(1):1

Share
Back to top
Journal of Biological Methods, Electronic ISSN: 2326-9901 Print ISSN: TAB, Published by POL Scientific