Hi guys,
In the case of mapping Illumina reads to a reference genome, I was discussing with various people whether to perform QC on raw fastq files or not, I get the impression that there is a 'for' and a 'against' stand point amongst NGS scientists... As I understand it, there is basically 2 point of views:
1) NO, do not QC! The aligner will take care of the bad quality reads and 3' quality deterioration and adapter contamination by soft clipping. The aligner STAR was mentioned in this context
2) YES, do QC! There is no reason to 'confuse' the aligner by introducing reads and bases and adapters, which are known to be of bad quality/technical artefact. Basically why keep noise, if it is easily identified and removed.
I'm interested in hearing your take on this matter?
Cheers,
Leon
In the case of mapping Illumina reads to a reference genome, I was discussing with various people whether to perform QC on raw fastq files or not, I get the impression that there is a 'for' and a 'against' stand point amongst NGS scientists... As I understand it, there is basically 2 point of views:
1) NO, do not QC! The aligner will take care of the bad quality reads and 3' quality deterioration and adapter contamination by soft clipping. The aligner STAR was mentioned in this context
2) YES, do QC! There is no reason to 'confuse' the aligner by introducing reads and bases and adapters, which are known to be of bad quality/technical artefact. Basically why keep noise, if it is easily identified and removed.
I'm interested in hearing your take on this matter?
Cheers,
Leon
Comment