From Tophat output "junctions.bed", we could know the position of junctions. I think this junction should be intron. But after I assembled tophat output by Cufflinks, I found that the position of intron is different from that of intron.
-
-
A couple of possibilities:
Have you done QC filtering using something like FASTX toolkit? Or maybe, it's just optional exons, or an alternative splice site. Have you looked at the DNA sequence to see if it has possible splice acceptor/donor sites? -
I mean, if junction area is intron area, tophat output and Cufflinks output should be consistent. But when I checked a gene, the intron area implied by Tophat and Cufflinks are different. Then I noticed that many genes have this problem.Originally posted by scottyler89 View PostComment
-
It might be worth double checking that the GTF file your using matches the bowtie alignment index. It's possible if they are from different builds of the same genome, the indexes for the alignments wouldn't match up with the expected intron/exon junctions.Comment
-
CRISPR/Cas9 sparked the gene editing revolution for both research and therapeutics.1 But this system still showed severe issues that limited its applications. The most prominent were the heavy reliance on PAM sequences, delivery limitations, double-stranded breaks that prompt unintended edits and cell death, and editing inefficiency (both in targeting and in knock-in reliability).
Despite this, “CRISPR helped turn genome editing from a specialized technique into...07-31-2026, 11:01 AM -
Proteomics platforms are evolving rapidly, with advances in mass spectrometry and affinity-based approaches expanding what researchers can detect and at what scale. As the field moves toward deeper proteome coverage and clinical applications, scientists face an increasingly complex landscape of tools. This article will explore how researchers are navigating these choices to find the right platform for their work.
The systematic characterization of the human proteome has...07-20-2026, 11:48 AM
Comment