Seqanswers Leaderboard Ad

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • De novo transcriptome quality metrics?

    Hi everyone

    I'm going to be making several de novo transcriptome assemblies (using different software), and I wish to compare them. What metrics are best for this? I don't have a reference genome.

    Also, is there a software package for generating these metrics from output files? I've currently tried running Trinity, and I get a lot of output files, but none that seem to summarize the number of contigs, their length, etc. How can I calculate this from a fasta file of assembled contigs?

  • #2
    Hi LizBent,

    I have been working on the exact same problem and have come up with some metrics to estimate the quality of a transcriptome in the absence of a ref genome. Some stats that I have used are:
    *n50
    *percent annotated to my closest reference
    *percent of annotated proteins that have (what seem to be) premature stop codons
    *percent of reads used/percent of paired reads used
    *contiguity & completeness (see http://www.nature.com/nrg/journal/v1...l/nrg3068.html)
    *incidence of chimeric transcripts

    As for calculating simple metrics like n50, max contig size, etc, I use the command line program abyss-fac, which is available as part of the general ABySS package.

    Good luck!

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by ssing View Post
      *incidence of chimeric transcripts
      hi ssing,

      how do you calculate chimeric transcripts? Do you have a reference genome? My problem is, I don't, and I don't know of a good way to find chimeric contigs in my assemblies.

      thanks

      Comment


      • #4
        There're a few solutions to calculating metrics for an assembly.

        1. https://github.com/ajmazurie/velvet-stats
        2. Biopieces
        3.http://korflab.ucdavis.edu/datasets/...athon_stats.pl
        4. abyss-fac

        I don't recommend 1-3. The documentation is bad, I didn't have the time to go through the source code. Biopieces required a multi-stage workflow, which I think it's a very stupid idea.

        Use abyss-fac, don't waste your time. On a Mac, install it via "brew install abyss"

        Comment


        • #5
          Old thread, but BBMap has a stats.sh program that will summarize basic assembly stats (N50, L50, distribution of contig sizes, GC%, etc); it's very fast even on assemblies with millions of contigs, and extremely easy to use:

          stats.sh contigs.fasta

          For more advanced statistics, particularly if you have a reference and are evaluating different assembly methodologies, I recommend Quast because it also does alignment to the reference to calculate the number of misassemblies. Also, even if you don't have a reference, it does neat things like gene prediction. Not sure how that feature would work on a transcriptome, though.
          Last edited by Brian Bushnell; 05-12-2015, 06:26 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Brian Bushnell View Post
            For more advanced statistics, particularly if you have a reference and are evaluating different assembly methodologies, I recommend Quast because it also does alignment to the reference to calculate the number of misassemblies.
            Their (excellent, I love SPAdes and QUAST) group is developing rnaQUAST, to evaluate transcriptome assemblies. Version 0.1.1 (current version at the time of my message) has a bug, though, reference transcriptome file naming has to strictly follow:

            Code:
            name.extension
            I could not use a reference which had:

            Code:
            name.middle.extension
            Last edited by nepossiver; 05-13-2015, 08:06 AM. Reason: added rnaQUAST link.

            Comment


            • #7
              There are tools like CGAL and RSEM-EVAL, which calculate the likelyhood of the reads belonging to the actual assembly. That might help when you're having more than 1.

              Since sometimes the size of the assembly can vary too, I also like to have an estimate of the genome size beforehand, tools to use are kmerspectrumanalyzer or kmergenie.

              And depending on how fragmented you can/want to get with the data: A most likely correct genome (not necessarily contigous) will be to take the consensus from all your assemblies, and break the contigs if they're not agreeing.

              <s>If you arrive at a chromosome, and you have a prokaryote, then you need to take a look at the GC skew of the chromosome to detect obvious misassemblies.</s> scratch that, didn't see the transcriptome part.
              EDIT: Eh, no strike through tags in this forum?

              Comment


              • #8
                I should say Biopieces is pretty nifty for this task:




                You simply do:

                Code:
                read_fasta -i contigs.fna |
                grab -e "SEQ_LEN>=200" |
                analyze_assembly -x
                and get:

                Code:
                N50: 9082
                MAX: 52038
                MIN: 200
                MEAN: 4170
                TOTAL: 3057214
                COUNT: 733
                ---

                Comment

                Latest Articles

                Collapse

                • seqadmin
                  Best Practices for Single-Cell Sequencing Analysis
                  by seqadmin



                  While isolating and preparing single cells for sequencing was historically the bottleneck, recent technological advancements have shifted the challenge to data analysis. This highlights the rapidly evolving nature of single-cell sequencing. The inherent complexity of single-cell analysis has intensified with the surge in data volume and the incorporation of diverse and more complex datasets. This article explores the challenges in analysis, examines common pitfalls, offers...
                  06-06-2024, 07:15 AM
                • seqadmin
                  Latest Developments in Precision Medicine
                  by seqadmin



                  Technological advances have led to drastic improvements in the field of precision medicine, enabling more personalized approaches to treatment. This article explores four leading groups that are overcoming many of the challenges of genomic profiling and precision medicine through their innovative platforms and technologies.

                  Somatic Genomics
                  “We have such a tremendous amount of genetic diversity that exists within each of us, and not just between us as individuals,”...
                  05-24-2024, 01:16 PM

                ad_right_rmr

                Collapse

                News

                Collapse

                Topics Statistics Last Post
                Started by seqadmin, Today, 08:58 AM
                0 responses
                8 views
                0 likes
                Last Post seqadmin  
                Started by seqadmin, Yesterday, 02:20 PM
                0 responses
                14 views
                0 likes
                Last Post seqadmin  
                Started by seqadmin, 06-07-2024, 06:58 AM
                0 responses
                181 views
                0 likes
                Last Post seqadmin  
                Started by seqadmin, 06-06-2024, 08:18 AM
                0 responses
                231 views
                0 likes
                Last Post seqadmin  
                Working...
                X