Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • krespim
    Member
    • Jul 2012
    • 49

    Replicating the "Tuxedo" yields different results

    Hi all,

    Like many I am trying to replicate the TopHat/cufflinks/Cumerbund protocol recently published and after sorting out a series of errors, I've finally managed to see the results with Cumerbund. The problem is that these do not match those of the paper. Could you please help me identifying where the problem might come from?
    Software/script - underlined are the changes that were made to the original protocol so that it could run:
    bowtie 0.12.7

    tophat 2.0.3
    tophat --bowtie1 -p 20 -G genes.gtf -r 180 -o genome C1_R1_1.fq C1_R1_2.fq
    (..)
    cufflinks-1.2.1
    cufflinks -p 20 -o C1_R1_clout C1_R1_thout/accepted_hits.bam

    cuffmerge -g genes.gtf -s genome.fa -p 20 assemblies.txt

    cuffdiff -o diff_out -b genome.fa -p 20 -L C1,C2 -u merged_asm/merged.gtf ./C1_R1_thout/accepted_hits.bam,./C1_R3_thout/accepted_hits.bam ./C2_R1_thout/accepted_hits.bam,./C2_R3_thout/accepted_hits.bam

    Results
    The distribution of expression levels for each sample is:


    But should have been (from the paper):


    The number of genes and transcripts that are differentially expressed between two samples are also different:
    > cuff_data
    CuffSet instance with:
    2 samples
    2663 genes
    4376 isoforms
    3086 TSS
    1427 CDS
    2663 promoters
    3086 splicing
    1304 relCDS
    > gene_diff_data <- diffData(genes(cuff_data))
    > sig_gene_data <- subset(gene_diff_data, (significant == 'yes'))
    > nrow(sig_gene_data)
    [1] 1117
    > cuff_data_tux <- readCufflinks('/home/domingue/TuxedoTestData/diff_out')
    > cuff_data #my analysis
    CuffSet instance with:
    2 samples
    2663 genes
    4376 isoforms
    3086 TSS
    1427 CDS
    2663 promoters
    3086 splicing
    1304 relCDS


    > cuff_data_tux #what should have been
    CuffSet instance with:
    2 samples
    14353 genes
    26464 isoforms
    17442 TSS
    13727 CDS
    14353 promoters
    17442 splicing
    11372 relCDS

    For diagnostic purposes, these are the number of fragments that map to each chromosome with my settings:

    C1_R1_thout/accepted_hits.bam
    2L 23011544 4657196 0
    2R 21146708 4974320 0
    3L 24543557 4055890 0
    3R 27905053 5353776 0
    4 1351857 202238 0
    M 19517 0 0
    X 22422827 4164550 0
    * 0 0 0
    (..)

    Any help is appreciated.
  • krespim
    Member
    • Jul 2012
    • 49

    #2
    I've just noticed something about the command lines in the protocol:

    1. Map the reads for each sample to the reference genome:

    $ tophat -p 8 -G genes.gtf -o C1_R1_thout genome C1_R1_1.fq C1_R1_2.fq

    $ tophat -p 8 -G genes.gtf -o C1_R2_thout genome C1_R2_1.fq C1_R2_2.fq

    $ tophat -p 8 -G genes.gtf -o C1_R3_thout genome C1_R3_1.fq C1_R3_2.fq

    $ tophat -p 8 -G genes.gtf -o C2_R1_thout genome C2_R1_1.fq C1_R1_2.fq

    $ tophat -p 8 -G genes.gtf -o C2_R2_thout genome C2_R2_1.fq C1_R2_2.fq

    $ tophat -p 8 -G genes.gtf -o C2_R3_thout genome C2_R3_1.fq C1_R3_2.fq

    The two sets of paired reads should come from the same experimental condition, however, and if I read the command properly, it seems to be calling the replicates of condition 2 (C2_R1_1.fq) paired with replicates from condition 1 (C1_R1_2.fq). C1 was now changed to C2 to test if that is the problem.

    UPDATE: no, still the same results.
    Last edited by krespim; 07-25-2012, 05:25 AM.

    Comment

    Latest Articles

    Collapse

    • SEQadmin2
      Nine Things a Sample Prep Scientist Thinks About Before Sequencing
      by SEQadmin2


      I’m not a sequencing expert. I’m a purification scientist who uses NGS to evaluate workflows my group develops. With this perspective, we think about the sample first and the NGS workflow second. The sequencer is an exceptionally honest reporter, but it can only report on what you give it, so whether you get clean, interpretable data from an NGS workflow is largely determined before you begin.

      Here are nine questions we think about, in roughly the order they matter, before...
      06-18-2026, 07:11 AM
    • SEQadmin2
      From Collection to Sequencing: Why Sample Preparation and Preservation Define Sequencing Data
      by SEQadmin2


      Data variability is still an issue in sequencing technologies despite the advances in reproducibility and accuracy of these platforms. But the problem does not originate in the sequencing itself, but in the previous steps, before the sample reaches the sequencer.


      The first step is collection, followed by preservation and sample preparation for analysis. Most scientists overlook those steps, but not being careful might just be skewing the experiment’s results.
      ...
      06-02-2026, 10:05 AM

    ad_right_rmr

    Collapse

    News

    Collapse

    Topics Statistics Last Post
    Started by SEQadmin2, Today, 05:37 AM
    0 responses
    5 views
    0 reactions
    Last Post SEQadmin2  
    Started by SEQadmin2, 06-26-2026, 11:10 AM
    0 responses
    16 views
    0 reactions
    Last Post SEQadmin2  
    Started by SEQadmin2, 06-17-2026, 06:09 AM
    0 responses
    49 views
    0 reactions
    Last Post SEQadmin2  
    Started by SEQadmin2, 06-09-2026, 11:58 AM
    0 responses
    109 views
    0 reactions
    Last Post SEQadmin2  
    Working...