Tweet
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
-
Genomics studies in neuroscience face a special challenge due to the brain’s complexity and scarcity of samples. Mapping changes in cell type and state using conventional next-generation sequencing methods remains challenging. Advances in technologies like single-cell sequencing, spatial transcriptomics, and long-read sequencing have opened the door to deeper studies of the brain and diseases like Alzheimer’s, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), and schizophrenia.
...07-09-2026, 11:10 AM -
Cancer survival rates have significantly increased in the last few decades in the United States, reaching a combined 70% 5-year survival rate by 2021. Behind this number, there are years of research to find new therapies, drug targets, and early detection methods. But there is one core challenge that keeps slowing down these advances, and it’s about drug resistance.
There is no single reason why many patients don’t respond to treatment as expected. Cancer is...07-08-2026, 05:17 AM -
Love this - good data definitely starts from good input, and poor input can only give relatively poor data. I particularly like the mention of Nanodrop/absorbance based methods for quantification. It's such a toss up if you'll get an accurate reading or what amounts to a randomly generated number, and a lot of library/sequencing related issues can be traced back to poor quant.07-01-2026, 11:43 AM
Comment