Seqanswers Leaderboard Ad

Collapse

Announcement

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

  • lh3
    replied
    I forgot the version I was trying. It has been a while. SNAP does require a lot of memory, tens of GB for human genome. I don't know if it works for genomes longer than 4GB.

    I have talked to the SNAP developers once. They are extremely strong on the technical end.

    Bwa works on nt. The index is here (max 20 connections):

    ftp://hengli-data:[email protected]/nt/

    You need ~110GB RAM for mapping.

    Leave a comment:


  • ymc
    replied
    I found that later in the pipeline requires indexing the 70GB nt file.

    I suppose this might require more than 1TB RAM to run. I don't think I have budget for such a machine. I might as well think about using bwa as a sub...

    Leave a comment:


  • ymc
    replied
    Originally posted by lh3 View Post
    My last comment was old. Recent snap is good. It is very fast and fairly accurate. What I am not sure is whether it is able to find a bit longer indels.
    Are you talking about the 1.0beta or the old 0.15.4?

    What about RAM usage?

    Thanks

    Leave a comment:


  • lh3
    replied
    My last comment was old. Recent snap is good. It is very fast and fairly accurate. What I am not sure is whether it is able to find a bit longer indels.

    Leave a comment:


  • ymc
    replied
    Originally posted by Brian Bushnell View Post
    SNAP is incredibly fast but very inaccurate in my testing, which was over a year ago; it may have improved. Also it has (or had, anyway) a hard limit of ~3gbp reference size. Human HG19 barely fit in some versions, and didn't on others.

    So - if that file is more than 3 gigabases or so, it won't work no matter how much RAM you have. BBMap is slower than SNAP, but has no upper bound on the number of scaffolds or total reference size; it works on both refseq microbial and nt. It does, however, require ~6 bytes per bp, or roughly 3 bytes per bp in low-memory mode.
    Oh I see. Thanks for your quick reply.

    I am trying the SURPI pipeline developed by UCSF

    I think I will try to understand its script and see if it is possible to substitute snap with bwa...

    Leave a comment:


  • Brian Bushnell
    replied
    SNAP is incredibly fast but very inaccurate in my testing, which was over a year ago; it may have improved. Also it has (or had, anyway) a hard limit of ~3gbp reference size. Human HG19 barely fit in some versions, and didn't on others.

    So - if that file is more than 3 gigabases or so, it won't work no matter how much RAM you have. BBMap is slower than SNAP, but has no upper bound on the number of scaffolds or total reference size; it works on both refseq microbial and nt. It does, however, require ~6 bytes per bp, or roughly 3 bytes per bp in low-memory mode.

    Leave a comment:


  • ymc
    replied
    Hi I tried to index this fasta with "-s 16" parameter but I couldn't do it with 64GB RAM. Can someone give it a try and tell me how much RAM I need to run this??



    Thanks a lot in advance

    The command line looks like:
    snap index Bacterial_Refseq_05172012.CLEAN.LenFiltered.uniq.fa snap_index_Bacterial_Refseq_05172012.CLEAN.LenFiltered.uniq_s16 -s 16 -O1000

    Leave a comment:


  • apratap
    replied
    The current version if SNAP as I understand is mainly supported for human genome...I had a list of trouble getting it to run on other genomes and finally gave it..may need some more time to turn into a mature software.

    -Abhi

    Leave a comment:


  • lh3
    replied
    Hmm... "bwa fastmap" takes 11 seconds. Although "fastmap" does not give the final alignments, it only takes a few more seconds to generate them. The accuracy is about 0.05% as I remember. To this end, snap is only marginally faster than fastmap, while taking 7X more memory.

    Leave a comment:


  • lh3
    replied
    Didn't know this. Quite impressive. For my simulated 100*2 data set, bwa takes 71 seconds. Snap is indeed much faster. Here is the "time" output:

    real 5m27.244s
    user 0m3.329s
    sys 0m15.825s

    Note that the CPU time taken by snap should be between 3.3 and 3.3+15.8 seconds. It is hard to get an accurate timing on my tiny data set (so don't take mine as a good evaluation). For snap, most wall-clock time goes to index loading. My machine cannot cache the entire snap index in memory.

    On accuracy, bwa is able to align 93% of reads without a single mismapping (bowtie2 is similar; novoalign can do even better), while for the highest mapQ=60, 0.05% snap mappings are wrong, which means snap does not have enough power to distinguish some good and bad hits. The manuscript chooses 0.05% as the cutoff because snap is unable to achieve higher accuracy while bwa can. That being said, how much 0.05% mismapping matters to variant calling is unknown to me (certainly matters to SV discovery); accuracy on real data may also be different.

    The peak memory used by snap is about 37GB, not as bad as 64GB.

    In summary, snap trades memory for speed to achieve >10X speedup in comparison to bwa. For 100bp simulated PE reads, it is not as accurate as bwa and novoalign, but its accuracy is arguably sufficient for SNP/indel calling.

    Leave a comment:


  • xied75
    started a topic Anyone using SNAP from UC Berkeley?

    Anyone using SNAP from UC Berkeley?

    I might late for the game, but this thing http://snap.cs.berkeley.edu/ said it's 10-100x faster than BWA etc. With a cost of needing 64GB memory.

    Best,

    dong

Latest Articles

Collapse

  • seqadmin
    Multiomics Techniques Advancing Disease Research
    by seqadmin


    New and advanced multiomics tools and technologies have opened new avenues of research and markedly enhanced various disciplines such as disease research and precision medicine1. The practice of merging diverse data from various ‘omes increasingly provides a more holistic understanding of biological systems. As Maddison Masaeli, Co-Founder and CEO at Deepcell, aptly noted, “You can't explain biology in its complex form with one modality.”

    A major leap in the field has
    ...
    02-08-2024, 06:33 AM

ad_right_rmr

Collapse

News

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by seqadmin, 02-23-2024, 04:11 PM
1 response
21 views
0 likes
Last Post kim897
by kim897
 
Started by seqadmin, 02-21-2024, 08:52 AM
0 responses
38 views
0 likes
Last Post seqadmin  
Started by seqadmin, 02-20-2024, 08:57 AM
0 responses
26 views
0 likes
Last Post seqadmin  
Started by seqadmin, 02-14-2024, 09:19 AM
0 responses
58 views
0 likes
Last Post seqadmin  
Working...
X