Is anyone using/testing Bioscope as a replacement for corona lite and the whole transcriptome pipeline? I've recently installed it on our cluster and was curious to find other opinions/experiences with it.
Seqanswers Leaderboard Ad
Collapse
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
-
I have been using it for re-sequencing (still testing). BS bundles a bunch of different experiment, WT among them. I would say, download the software and start by
running the examples that come with it. Once you have it up and running modify it
to work with your data and test it out.
ABi supports SGE and PBS. THe installation in non-root mode is not extremely invasive so I would suggest you start by that.
Let us know how it goes.-drd
-
Bioscope has, in theory, a very nice workflow where you specify a 'plan' of modules to use for a given project. As an example the 'plan' may call the 'quality value filter' module, then the 'mapping' module, then in parallel the 'mapping statistics' module plus the 'GFF' module. And so on. Each module has their own 'ini' (initialization) file which in addition to per-module commands can read in a global ini file and a per-project ini file. Once you have a 'plan' set up then you just hand it off to the workflow schedule and it runs the project.
All very nice. Except ... the ini files do not pass information between each other. Nor do they use consistent parameter names. Some of the parameters are used but undocumented. The modules make unwarranted assumptions on what the previous module has done. A common example involves file names where the output file name of a module may not be in the format that the next module can understand as its input file name. Ditto with other parameters. I set a parameter in the per-project ini file and expect it to filter down through the modules -- which it does to the most part but I will often find at least one module which does not accept the parameter.
That is what I mean by 'fragile' and 'fall apart'. Touch or change one small part of the plan and the pipeline fails.
Of course this is version 1.0 of Bioscope. The software is really only used by a handful of people (as compared to, say, Microsoft Word). Thus we should expect that we will be de-facto beta testers and will encounter rough spots. Lifetech/ABI support is very responsive in trying to fix problems that I find.
Comment
-
Originally posted by westerman View PostBioscope has, in theory, a very nice workflow where you specify a 'plan' of modules to use for a given project. As an example the 'plan' may call the 'quality value filter' module, then the 'mapping' module, then in parallel the 'mapping statistics' module plus the 'GFF' module. And so on. Each module has their own 'ini' (initialization) file which in addition to per-module commands can read in a global ini file and a per-project ini file. Once you have a 'plan' set up then you just hand it off to the workflow schedule and it runs the project.
All very nice. Except ... the ini files do not pass information between each other. Nor do they use consistent parameter names. Some of the parameters are used but undocumented. The modules make unwarranted assumptions on what the previous module has done. A common example involves file names where the output file name of a module may not be in the format that the next module can understand as its input file name. Ditto with other parameters. I set a parameter in the per-project ini file and expect it to filter down through the modules -- which it does to the most part but I will often find at least one module which does not accept the parameter.
That is what I mean by 'fragile' and 'fall apart'. Touch or change one small part of the plan and the pipeline fails.
Of course this is version 1.0 of Bioscope. The software is really only used by a handful of people (as compared to, say, Microsoft Word). Thus we should expect that we will be de-facto beta testers and will encounter rough spots. Lifetech/ABI support is very responsive in trying to fix problems that I find.
My five cents:
PROs:
+ dramatic improvement in terms of running time compared with CL
+ increase of sensitivity with same specificity.
+ Much more resource efficient both IO and CPU (it is multithreaded now)
+ Easier to start analysis (at least compared to corona lite)
CONs:
+ Still to many unnecessary files being generated
+ BAM is not the standard format to drop the alignments. Valuable
CPU cycles and I/O bandwidth wasted in postprocessing.
+ Changes in the reporting stats don't match the old corona lite. They mainly
report uniquely mapped reads.-drd
Comment
-
Originally posted by drio View PostI have been using it for re-sequencing (still testing). BS bundles a bunch of different experiment, WT among them. I would say, download the software and start by
running the examples that come with it. Once you have it up and running modify it
to work with your data and test it out.
ABi supports SGE and PBS. THe installation in non-root mode is not extremely invasive so I would suggest you start by that.
Let us know how it goes.
Comment
-
Originally posted by skblazer View PostExcuse me, where can I download Bioscope-drd
Comment
-
I think that ABI/LifeTech are still just releasing the bioscope software on an 'as-need' basis until such time as they have it in releasable form. The last public link that have at the web site is for SAET. I do not see a public mention of bioscope.
Comment
-
Yes. I can run fragment to diBayes calls, pairing to diBayes calls and most recently the whole transcriptome calling. All command line. It has been a bear to get running smoothly since the assumptions that the various pipelines run under seem to be different.
Comment
-
Just saw this post. We were able to use a Whole-transcriptome pipeline of BioScope (1.0.1-42) on a RNA-seq dataset. And a note about its mapping statistics. I confirmed with their specialists that the current version of BS has bug on those numbers. so it will be fixed in next release, hopefully very soon.
We have a feeling that a large proportion of reads are wasted for SOLiD data compared to Solexa. For example, for a current chip-seq dataset, we have seen a average of 80M reads generated for a sample (quad). However, after filtering of low quality alignment and non-unique hits, only ~4% of reads could be used for further peak detection. Has anyone have similar experience? Does this sound normal?
Comment
-
Originally posted by westerman View PostYes. I can run fragment to diBayes calls, pairing to diBayes calls and most recently the whole transcriptome calling. All command line. It has been a bear to get running smoothly since the assumptions that the various pipelines run under seem to be different.
Comment
Latest Articles
Collapse
-
by seqadmin
Innovations in next-generation sequencing technologies and techniques are driving more precise and comprehensive exploration of complex biological systems. Current advancements include improved accessibility for long-read sequencing and significant progress in single-cell and 3D genomics. This article explores some of the most impactful developments in the field over the past year.
Long-Read Sequencing
Long-read sequencing has...-
Channel: Articles
12-02-2024, 01:49 PM -
-
by seqadmin
The field of immunogenetics explores how genetic variations influence immune responses and susceptibility to disease. In a recent SEQanswers webinar, Oscar Rodriguez, Ph.D., Postdoctoral Researcher at the University of Louisville, and Ruben MartÃnez Barricarte, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Medicine at Vanderbilt University, shared recent advancements in immunogenetics. This article discusses their research on genetic variation in antibody loci, antibody production processes,...-
Channel: Articles
11-06-2024, 07:24 PM -
ad_right_rmr
Collapse
News
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by seqadmin, 12-02-2024, 09:29 AM
|
0 responses
148 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seqadmin
12-02-2024, 09:29 AM
|
||
Started by seqadmin, 12-02-2024, 09:06 AM
|
0 responses
51 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seqadmin
12-02-2024, 09:06 AM
|
||
Started by seqadmin, 12-02-2024, 08:03 AM
|
0 responses
42 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seqadmin
12-02-2024, 08:03 AM
|
||
Started by seqadmin, 11-22-2024, 07:36 AM
|
0 responses
73 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seqadmin
11-22-2024, 07:36 AM
|
Comment