Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • jnfass
    Member
    • Aug 2008
    • 88

    #1

    BayesCall -- has anyone tried it?

    Has anyone had success trying out BayesCall? I'm wondering if it's worth benchmarking ...

    Genome Res. 2009 Oct;19(10):1884-95. Epub 2009 Aug 6.
    BayesCall: A model-based base-calling algorithm for high-throughput short-read sequencing.
    Kao WC, Stevens K, Song YS.

    (available here):
    Last edited by jnfass; 11-25-2009, 11:59 AM. Reason: wrong name in title (BayesCall, not BayesCaller)
  • mehdik
    Junior Member
    • Aug 2009
    • 3

    #2
    I installed BayesCall, I am able to install all the prerequisites as well as BayesCall. The first part EM.py starts but I am stuck at multiple runtime erros in the python scripts. Anyone succeeded in properly running the program?

    Comment

    • darked89
      Member
      • Jun 2009
      • 38

      #3
      BayesCall -- has anyone tried it?

      Originally posted by mehdik View Post
      I installed BayesCall, I am able to install all the prerequisites as well as BayesCall. The first part EM.py starts but I am stuck at multiple runtime errors in the python scripts. Anyone succeeded in properly running the program?
      Not yet but it will be good to compare notes.
      I downloaded version BayesCall 0.3, compiled it with GSL 0.13. Run into:

      ===
      Traceback (most recent call last):
      File "EM.py", line 557, in <module>
      if any(all(array(intensity)<=0.1, 1)):
      File "/soft/general/python-2.5.2/lib/python2.5/site-packages/numpy/core/fromnumeric.py",
      line 1422, in all
      return all(axis, out)
      ValueError: axis(=1) out of bounds
      ===

      Got a hint from BayesCall Authors that I should convert my cif files to txt using cif2txt.
      Found it here:


      edited it a bit, then did the conversion. At this moment I am running since 20+mins:

      python EM.py -u 4 --seq_len 36 test_100104/091220_11AB2AABB_out/s_4_0*int.txt

      and it produces a bunch of *_int.mat files.

      So I will keep you posted how it went. Did you passed that stage and got errors afterwards?

      Darek Kedra

      PS I have:
      Python 2.5.2,
      * print numpy.__version__
      1.3.0
      * print scipy.__version__
      0.7.1rc2

      on 2.6.23.1-42.fc8 #1 SMP x86_64 GNU/Linux

      Comment

      • lcollado
        Member
        • Jun 2009
        • 65

        #4
        Hello,

        Were you able to run BayesCall correctly? Also, do you keep using it and what is your experience vs the different SolexaPipeline versions?

        Thank you,
        Leonardo
        L. Collado Torres, Ph.D. student in Biostatistics.

        Comment

        • zero
          Junior Member
          • Feb 2010
          • 4

          #5
          Hi Leonardo,

          I've done some testing of BayesCall using text files. Initially I did a couple of tiles and compared the qc metrics of the output. The data was much better using BayesCall. Saying that, our input data is pretty poor, so there is lot of room for improvement. Original data was GAIIx using Illumina RTA image processing and pipeline 1.5.1. What you will notice is that it takes a while, i.e. the parameter estimation took several hours (depends on the number of tiles you use), but the base calling itself (since v0.3 using naive basecaller) is fairly quick on a Nehalem 8-core. Our data (2x76 PE run) improved from median Phred = 20 up to base 53 to median Phred = 21 up to last base. So I would say its definitely worth a try.

          Comment

          • nilshomer
            Nils Homer
            • Nov 2008
            • 1283

            #6
            Originally posted by zero View Post
            Hi Leonardo,

            I've done some testing of BayesCall using text files. Initially I did a couple of tiles and compared the qc metrics of the output. The data was much better using BayesCall. Saying that, our input data is pretty poor, so there is lot of room for improvement. Original data was GAIIx using Illumina RTA image processing and pipeline 1.5.1. What you will notice is that it takes a while, i.e. the parameter estimation took several hours (depends on the number of tiles you use), but the base calling itself (since v0.3 using naive basecaller) is fairly quick on a Nehalem 8-core. Our data (2x76 PE run) improved from median Phred = 20 up to base 53 to median Phred = 21 up to last base. So I would say its definitely worth a try.
            Is the Phred calculated after alignment or are they reported by BayesCall? I would be interested to know if it improves the base error-rate after alignment.

            Comment

            • zero
              Junior Member
              • Feb 2010
              • 4

              #7
              these scores are from BayesCall itself.

              Comment

              • lcollado
                Member
                • Jun 2009
                • 65

                #8
                Thank you for your feedback
                L. Collado Torres, Ph.D. student in Biostatistics.

                Comment

                Latest Articles

                Collapse

                • SEQadmin2
                  Multiomic Liquid Biopsy: What DNA/RNA Panels Reveal That DNA Alone Can’t
                  by SEQadmin2



                  Tumors contain complex mixtures of cell populations that evolve in response to treatment and host-specific factors. Tissue biopsies provide only static snapshots of a tumor’s state. But what if we could follow that evolution over time using a minimally invasive technique?

                  Liquid biopsies can detect tumor-derived material circulating in the bloodstream, providing a way to study treatment response, detect emerging resistance, and discover new biomarkers. Circulating
                  ...
                  10-14-2026, 09:55 AM
                • SEQadmin2
                  New Genomics Technologies Take Aim at Long-Standing Limits
                  by SEQadmin2


                  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
                  ...
                  09-28-2026, 10:25 AM

                ad_right_rmr

                Collapse

                News

                Collapse

                Topics Statistics Last Post
                Started by SEQadmin2, 10-22-2026, 11:13 AM
                0 responses
                26 views
                0 reactions
                Last Post SEQadmin2  
                Started by SEQadmin2, 10-22-2026, 10:48 AM
                0 responses
                20 views
                0 reactions
                Last Post SEQadmin2  
                Started by SEQadmin2, 10-15-2026, 10:52 AM
                0 responses
                36 views
                0 reactions
                Last Post SEQadmin2  
                Started by SEQadmin2, 10-14-2026, 05:39 AM
                0 responses
                43 views
                0 reactions
                Last Post SEQadmin2  
                Working...