Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • jbono
    Junior Member
    • May 2013
    • 4

    Filtering out transcripts from non target organism

    Hi,

    I am assembling a transcriptome for a Drosophila species without a reference genome (my species diverged from the most closely related with genome about 15 mya). I used Trinity for the assembly, which constructed over 65K components (which I assume is sort of like a gene). I'm guessing that a lot of the sequences are from non target species (e.g. bacteria, yeasts, cactus) as larvae were taken directly from their food source. Is there an easy way to identify and get rid of the bulk of the transcripts that come from non target species (e.g. using BLAST or something else)? All trinity transcripts are currently in FASTA format. I'm not particularly savvy with bioinformatics, so I'm sure if there is an easy pipeline I could use? Thanks!
  • Kennels
    Senior Member
    • Feb 2011
    • 149

    #2
    you might have assembled chimeric transcripts by using all the reads from different sources. Kind of like a metagenomic assembly, so you might want to read some papers that contain information on handling this sort of data.

    I would set up a 'contaminant' database containing all your non-target species, use a short read mapper (bowtie, bwa) to filter out reads that align to this database (i.e. take only the reads that didn't align to the contaminant database), and rerun trinity with only reads that didn't align.

    Otherwise as you mention you could make a blast database of your non-target sequences, and align your current assembly to it and take only those that did not align. I'm not aware of any pipeline that would automate this. You'll need to take all the component IDs that did align to this non-target database, and then subtract this from your original fasta file. This would best be done in command line, using bash or perl.
    The problem with this method is that there is a chance that your target sequences might also align to this non-target database, so you'll need to decide on some thresholds.

    Comment

    • jbono
      Junior Member
      • May 2013
      • 4

      #3
      Thanks for the quick response!
      I think the difficulty is that I have no idea what the non target organisms are so I don't think I could easily set up a database (it could be anything in rotting cactus). I assume this would be a typical issue with de novo assemblies but I haven't been able to find much information on how people are dealing with it, though I am continuing to look. My main goal is to look at differential expression, but I was hoping to create a transcriptome that is mostly free of contaminants before mapping reads back to it.

      Comment

      • Kennels
        Senior Member
        • Feb 2011
        • 149

        #4
        How close is your target species to D.mel ? Could you alternatively align your reads to this with relaxed parameters, and use those that aligned to do a de novo assembly?

        It also could be the contamination is at a minimal level. You could pick a few possible non-target organisms, and see what % of reads mapped to each, and decide if this is an acceptable level. Plus if your contaminant sequences are quite different to your Drosophila (bacteria vs plant vs fly), the assembler can still do a good job distinguishing and assembling the sequences. I.e. you might not even need to worry about it too much.

        Comment

        Latest Articles

        Collapse

        • SEQadmin2
          Advanced Sequencing Platforms Tackle Neuroscience’s Toughest Genomics Problems
          by SEQadmin2



          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
        • SEQadmin2
          Cancer Drug Resistance: The Lingering Barrier to Rising Survival
          by SEQadmin2



          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
        • GATTACAT
          Reply to Nine Things a Sample Prep Scientist Thinks About Before Sequencing
          by GATTACAT
          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

        ad_right_rmr

        Collapse

        News

        Collapse

        Topics Statistics Last Post
        Started by SEQadmin2, 07-13-2026, 10:26 AM
        0 responses
        15 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post SEQadmin2  
        Started by SEQadmin2, 07-09-2026, 10:04 AM
        0 responses
        29 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post SEQadmin2  
        Started by SEQadmin2, 07-08-2026, 10:08 AM
        0 responses
        16 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post SEQadmin2  
        Started by SEQadmin2, 07-07-2026, 11:05 AM
        0 responses
        33 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post SEQadmin2  
        Working...