Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Giorgio
    Junior Member
    • Oct 2010
    • 4

    Trinity assembly validation and statistics

    Hi All,

    After one week Trinity finally completed an assembly starting with 800 million reads (an entire Next Seq 500 run). The statistics are weird, although there were tons of sequences, but I would like your opinion:

    ################################

    ## Counts of transcripts, etc.

    ################################

    Total trinity 'genes': 858807

    Total trinity transcripts: 924905

    Percent GC: 40.20



    ########################################

    Stats based on ALL transcript contigs:

    ########################################



    Contig N10: 1739

    Contig N20: 769

    Contig N30: 490

    Contig N40: 382

    Contig N50: 324



    Median contig length: 270

    Average contig: 363.98

    Total assembled bases: 336649200





    #####################################################

    ## Stats based on ONLY LONGEST ISOFORM per 'GENE':

    #####################################################



    Contig N10: 1123

    Contig N20: 575

    Contig N30: 421

    Contig N40: 349

    Contig N50: 304



    Median contig length: 268

    Average contig: 341.45

    Total assembled bases: 293239534

    I used Trinity with default parameters and using --trimmomatic plus --min_kmer_cov 2. I really was expecting the N50 to be bigger. What can be the reason for that?

    Note: Before starting the assembly I quality filtered the sequences and merged the results in two big paired end fasta files.



    Please any advice can be precious!

    Thanks!

    Giorgio
  • sarika01
    Junior Member
    • May 2015
    • 2

    #2
    hello I
    I have used trinity for assembly..it give trinity.fatsa file and have 4785 sequences...but whn i run statics program it shown 5000 genes...pls help wht does it mean.

    Comment

    Latest Articles

    Collapse

    • 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
    • SEQadmin2
      Nine Things a Sample Prep Scientist Thinks About Before Sequencing
      by SEQadmin2


      I’m not a sequencing expert. I’m a purification scientist who uses NGS to evaluate workflows my group develops. With this perspective, we think about the sample first and the NGS workflow second. The sequencer is an exceptionally honest reporter, but it can only report on what you give it, so whether you get clean, interpretable data from an NGS workflow is largely determined before you begin.

      Here are nine questions we think about, in roughly the order they matter, before...
      06-18-2026, 07:11 AM

    ad_right_rmr

    Collapse

    News

    Collapse

    Topics Statistics Last Post
    Started by SEQadmin2, 07-02-2026, 11:08 AM
    0 responses
    25 views
    0 reactions
    Last Post SEQadmin2  
    Started by SEQadmin2, 06-30-2026, 05:37 AM
    0 responses
    23 views
    0 reactions
    Last Post SEQadmin2  
    Started by SEQadmin2, 06-26-2026, 11:10 AM
    0 responses
    23 views
    0 reactions
    Last Post SEQadmin2  
    Started by SEQadmin2, 06-17-2026, 06:09 AM
    0 responses
    55 views
    0 reactions
    Last Post SEQadmin2  
    Working...