Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • medalofhonour
    Member
    • Jul 2011
    • 18

    Tools to determine sequence contamination in Methyl-Seq data ?

    Hi,

    I have a question regarding determining sequence contamination from Methyl-Seq experiments.

    As we all know, for Methyl-Seq experiments, the bisulfite conversion step converts unmethylated C's to U's, which after sequencing become T's.

    I have Methyl-Seq data from a supposedly "human" sample sequenced on MiSeq, and the problem is that only 20% of the reads map to human reference hg19, using a methyl-seq specialized aligner BSMAP.

    I wish to find out where the 80% of the sequences are coming from, since they don't map to human.

    As we can intuitively see, I cannot just do something like take the overrepresented sequences from FASTQC, and do a quick BLAST to search for possible contamination from other organisms, since the overrepresented sequences could be bisulfite converted.

    Is there a tool out there that works like BLAST but takes into account bisulfite conversion while mapping sequences ? I know I could use BSMAP on the unmapped sequences (from human) and try and map them to other organisms, but that would take a longer time.

    Are there any other easy to use approaches I am missing out on ?
  • gandalf886
    Member
    • Feb 2013
    • 11

    #2
    I would just map the reads to the genome of potential contamination organism.
    I once got a RRBS library which is supposed to be human but the mapping efficiency is < 1%. I then tried to map to mouse and got 44% mapping efficiency. It turns out most of the DNA for library construction are contaminations from mouse feeder cells when we are making the human iPSC.

    Comment

    • medalofhonour
      Member
      • Jul 2011
      • 18

      #3
      Originally posted by gandalf886 View Post
      I would just map the reads to the genome of potential contamination organism.
      I once got a RRBS library which is supposed to be human but the mapping efficiency is < 1%. I then tried to map to mouse and got 44% mapping efficiency. It turns out most of the DNA for library construction are contaminations from mouse feeder cells when we are making the human iPSC.
      I tried mapping to mouse but no luck. My problem is that I don't really know potential contaminant organisms in this case.

      I will have to map to anything and everything to find out what could be the contaminant.

      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.
        ...
        Today, 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...
        Yesterday, 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, Today, 10:04 AM
      0 responses
      7 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post SEQadmin2  
      Started by SEQadmin2, Yesterday, 10:08 AM
      0 responses
      6 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post SEQadmin2  
      Started by SEQadmin2, 07-07-2026, 11:05 AM
      0 responses
      9 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post SEQadmin2  
      Started by SEQadmin2, 07-02-2026, 11:08 AM
      0 responses
      31 views
      0 reactions
      Last Post SEQadmin2  
      Working...