I have used Abyss and then Trans-abyss for a de novo transcriptome assembly with ~70 million reads on a machine with 20gb RAM. From what I've read Abyss is less RAM-intensive than other Trinity and SOAPdenovo. And the memory-intensive phase for Abyss and other assemblers is loading the hash table, which depends on the kmer size, not the number of reads. For these reasons I don't think memory is your issue. Your issue about a large number of duplicate reads specific to one pair of reads and not the other sounds like a possible issue--Abyss has issues when coverage is too high, for example. The Abyss support group is probably a good place to turn. https://groups.google.com/forum/?fro...um/abyss-users
-
-
From my experience MIRA performs very well on de novo tanscriptome assembliesComment
-
Trinity-duplicate removal
Dear All,
I am using trinity for transcriptomics assembly. I have few queries:-
1) have two condition(Control and Treated) and each condition has 4 replicates. so if I merge these .fq files together, how the generated assembly from this merged .fq file would be better than the assembly generated from single(using only one replicate) sample?
2) Do I need to remove duplicates from individual fastq file before merging or after merging them together?
3) I saw there is a script "fasta_remove_duplicates" in the trinity folder. So is there any chance that "In-silico-normalization" in trinity take care of these duplicate reads?
I would appreciate any explanations.Comment
-
Researchers using sequencing and genomics tools often have to make trade-offs. They can choose between speed or scale, short reads or long-range information, or targeted panels or a view of the whole transcriptome. New technologies that have been released this year are built to address those tough choices.
We asked six companies the same four questions to learn about their latest products. The new technologies bring a lot to the table, including rethinking sequencing...
Comment