Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • NYGen
    Member
    • Aug 2014
    • 20

    #1

    Why is predicted best k for de novo assembly so different from actual best k?

    Greetings everyone,

    I’m doing my first genome assembly for a non-model plant species, and I need some insight about best kmer lengths for DBG-based assembly. My NGS data is a full lane of Illumina HiSeq V4 2x125 with a single library of insert size 350. Using kmer-counting methods, such as Jellyfish, my predicted best value k has ranged from 93-101 due to the large number of reads and their relatively-long length for HiSeq reads.

    However, I have found all of my highest-quality assemblies at kmer-lengths <40, with my highest N50 and CEGs-mapped occurring at lengths 29 and 33, respectively. Does anyone know why I’m seeing such a large difference between predicted best k and actual best k? Given that it’s a discrepancy of more than 50bp, I feel like there’s got to be a common explanation that googling simply hasn’t turned up. I predict it’s related to heterogeneity in the reads, but I’m unable to find much elaboration on the effect of heterogeneous reads, so thanks for any insights!

Latest Articles

Collapse

  • SEQadmin2
    16S/ITS Profiling vs. Shotgun Metagenomics: What Changes in Your Workflow?
    by SEQadmin2




    NGS has revolutionized clinical microbiology by offering new ways to identify and surveil pathogens without prior knowledge of the target. One popular approach is 16S rRNA and ITS amplicon sequencing, which targets specific microbial markers. But studies are increasingly incorporating shotgun metagenomics, a technique that sequences all DNA from a sample without targeting specific microbial markers. This approach allows more detailed taxonomic classification, detection...
    Today, 06:46 AM
  • SEQadmin2
    Multiomic Liquid Biopsy: What DNA/RNA Panels Reveal That DNA Alone Can’t
    by SEQadmin2



    Tumors contain complex mixtures of cell populations that evolve in response to treatment and host-specific factors. Tissue biopsies provide only static snapshots of a tumor’s state. But what if we could follow that evolution over time using a minimally invasive technique?

    Liquid biopsies can detect tumor-derived material circulating in the bloodstream, providing a way to study treatment response, detect emerging resistance, and discover new biomarkers. Circulating
    ...
    10-14-2026, 09:55 AM

ad_right_rmr

Collapse

News

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by SEQadmin2, 10-28-2026, 09:57 AM
0 responses
23 views
0 reactions
Last Post SEQadmin2  
Started by SEQadmin2, 10-28-2026, 09:51 AM
0 responses
15 views
0 reactions
Last Post SEQadmin2  
Started by SEQadmin2, 10-22-2026, 11:13 AM
0 responses
68 views
0 reactions
Last Post SEQadmin2  
Started by SEQadmin2, 10-22-2026, 10:48 AM
0 responses
48 views
0 reactions
Last Post SEQadmin2  
Working...