Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • yarri
    Junior Member
    • Sep 2009
    • 1

    #1

    Assembly using phrap

    Hej!

    I am working on a data my group received from MWG. They were using, as far as I know 454 sequencing to sequence short 3' fragments of cDNA from two populations. My task is to assemble the data and compare the abundance of the transcript.
    I am a beginner, so please excuse me if my questions are silly, here they are:
    1. I have fasta and quality files. I feed them to phrap and I am getting an output - so far so good. Now, how can I obtain information on what was merged into the resulting contigs? I need this information to make comparison of transcript abundance. Phrap provides me with a huge report file but I am not sure how to find this information. Ideally I want to automate the process using python scripts - that is run assembly in phrap and parse the output so I can have a table with a contig sequence and number of reads that were used to create it.
    2. Is this even possible? Should I perhaps use some other tools?
    Thanks in advance.

    Best regards
    Marian Plaszczyca
  • maubp
    Peter (Biopython etc)
    • Jul 2009
    • 1544

    #2
    Since you said you would like to use Python, I'll just point out that Biopython can parse PHRED and ACE files.

    The ACE contig files tell you which reads went into each contig, which sounds like what you want to know.

    Peter

    Comment

    • BENM
      Member
      • May 2009
      • 33

      #3
      Originally posted by yarri View Post
      Hej!

      I am working on a data my group received from MWG. They were using, as far as I know 454 sequencing to sequence short 3' fragments of cDNA from two populations. My task is to assemble the data and compare the abundance of the transcript.
      I am a beginner, so please excuse me if my questions are silly, here they are:
      1. I have fasta and quality files. I feed them to phrap and I am getting an output - so far so good. Now, how can I obtain information on what was merged into the resulting contigs? I need this information to make comparison of transcript abundance. Phrap provides me with a huge report file but I am not sure how to find this information. Ideally I want to automate the process using python scripts - that is run assembly in phrap and parse the output so I can have a table with a contig sequence and number of reads that were used to create it.
      2. Is this even possible? Should I perhaps use some other tools?
      Thanks in advance.

      Best regards
      Marian Plaszczyca
      Hi, Marian
      I have a PERL script here, hope it will help you.
      Command: perl phraplist.pl phrap.out > phrap.list
      Code:
      #!/usr/bin/perl
      #phraplist.pl
      die "Usage:$0 phrap.out\n" if (@ARGV!=1);
      open(PhrapOut, "$ARGV[0]") ||die "could not open $ARGV[0]";
      @line=<PhrapOut>;
      $real=0;
      foreach $hang (@line) {
              if($hang =~/^Contig\s\d+.\s+\d+\s\w+;\s\d+\sbp/ ) {
                      $real=1;
              }
              $real=0 if($hang =~/Contig quality (.*):$/ || $hang =~/^Overall discrep rates/);
      	$real=0 if($hang=~"Overall");
      	print $hang if($real);
      }
      close(PhrapOut);
      The phrap.list contain information as below:

      Code:
      Contig 1.  7 reads; 685 bp (untrimmed), 653 (trimmed).  Isolated contig.
           -1   682 15_A8-9.ab1   604 (  0)  1.55 0.31 0.00   15 ( 58)   23 ( 23) 
            1   679 22_A8-9.ab1   635 (  0)  0.15 0.30 0.15    0 (  6)   23 ( 19) 
            2   673 11_A8-9_R.ab1  580 (  0)  0.67 0.00 0.17   65 ( 65)    6 ( 15) 
            5   686 10_A8-9.ab1   662 (  0)  0.44 0.15 0.00    2 (  2)    1 ( 27) 
            4   684 21_A8-9.ab1   648 (  0)  0.59 0.15 0.15    7 (  7)    1 ( 24) 
      C   139   522 A8-9.ref.scf  381 (  0)  0.00 0.00 0.00    0 (  0)    0 (  0) 
      C   352   641 23_A8-9.ab1   120 (  0)  0.00 0.00 0.79  147 (147)   16 ( 16)

      Comment

      Latest Articles

      Collapse

      • kinpict.com
        Reply to 16S/ITS Profiling vs. Shotgun Metagenomics: What Changes in Your Workflow?
        by kinpict.com
        The part about this topic feels surprisingly grounded, and the details on the page is the bit that made me slow down. I’d keep <a href="https://kinpict.com/">ai family photo generator</a> bookmarked for later.
        Today, 06:37 PM
      • 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,...
        10-30-2026, 06:46 AM

      ad_right_rmr

      Collapse

      News

      Collapse

      Topics Statistics Last Post
      Started by SEQadmin2, 11-12-2026, 07:59 AM
      0 responses
      27 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post SEQadmin2  
      Started by SEQadmin2, 11-05-2026, 09:25 AM
      0 responses
      35 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post SEQadmin2  
      Started by SEQadmin2, 11-03-2026, 11:54 AM
      2 responses
      56 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post kinpict.com  
      Started by SEQadmin2, 10-28-2026, 09:57 AM
      0 responses
      175 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post SEQadmin2  
      Working...