Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • dawn1313
    Member
    • Aug 2015
    • 21

    #1

    Is it necessary to do the same mapping/assembly for different samples?

    Hi,

    I am using tophat for the alignment of raw reads to a reference. I have total six samples, and half got around 70% concordant pair alignment rate whereas other half below 40% in the files of align_summary.txt.

    I wonder if I need to adjust either the tophat parameters or additional QC processes to try to increase those low alignment rate samples. Because I think all the processes (including mapping and assembly) for each sample should be SAME and thus no bias for the final differential expression. Is it correct?

    Thanks!!
    Dawn
  • bioBob
    Member
    • Mar 2011
    • 72

    #2
    What is the opposite of TMI?

    Lots of things can lead to issues in mapping. Sample degradation, sample contamination, etc. Seems to me that one of the things I would do is to get the reads that are not aligning and check a bunch of them out, are they short, blast to something, all A or T or etc.

    You mentioned assembly, is the reference a denovo transcriptome assembly? Did you use all the samples? Truly denovo or reference guided? What QC steps do you do?

    Comment

    • westerman
      Rick Westerman
      • Jun 2008
      • 1104

      #3
      Originally posted by dawn1313 View Post
      Because I think all the processes (including mapping and assembly) for each sample should be SAME and thus no bias for the final differential expression. Is it correct?
      To answer your direct question: yes, using the same processes for each sample should not cause a bias.

      However going along what bioBob wrote, you have something amiss. The suggestion of taking a handful of non-mapping reads from both the 70% mapping and 40% mapping samples and see what they blast-match to should be informative. Looking harder at your QC stats would be useful.

      Comment

      • dawn1313
        Member
        • Aug 2015
        • 21

        #4
        Thanks for your reply. I didn't do QC filtering and I started with Tophat because it seems quite good and similar qualities measured by FastQc for all six samples.

        I wonder if the low mapping could result from the biological cause (one gene knocked down vs wild type) and in this case I just go ahead to do assembly.

        Thanks!
        Dawn

        Comment

        • Brian Bushnell
          Super Moderator
          • Jan 2014
          • 2709

          #5
          If you are experience such extremely low alignment and pairing rates with TopHat, I suggest you try BBMap, which is much more sensitive. Low alignment rates caused by errors and differences between the reference and the subject will incur bias even if your process is the same, because alignment sensitivity is not continuous, but stepwise.

          Comment

          Latest Articles

          Collapse

          • SEQadmin2
            Beyond CRISPR/Cas9: Understand, Choose, and Use the Right Genome Editing Tool
            by SEQadmin2



            CRISPR/Cas9 sparked the gene editing revolution for both research and therapeutics.1 But this system still showed severe issues that limited its applications. The most prominent were the heavy reliance on PAM sequences, delivery limitations, double-stranded breaks that prompt unintended edits and cell death, and editing inefficiency (both in targeting and in knock-in reliability).

            Despite this, “CRISPR helped turn genome editing from a specialized technique into
            ...
            07-31-2026, 11:01 AM
          • SEQadmin2
            Proteomic Platforms: How to Choose the Right Analytical Strategy to Improve Detection and Clinical Applications
            by SEQadmin2


            Proteomics platforms are evolving rapidly, with advances in mass spectrometry and affinity-based approaches expanding what researchers can detect and at what scale. As the field moves toward deeper proteome coverage and clinical applications, scientists face an increasingly complex landscape of tools. This article will explore how researchers are navigating these choices to find the right platform for their work.

            The systematic characterization of the human proteome has
            ...
            07-20-2026, 11:48 AM

          ad_right_rmr

          Collapse

          News

          Collapse

          Topics Statistics Last Post
          Started by SEQadmin2, 08-13-2026, 12:22 PM
          0 responses
          31 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Started by SEQadmin2, 08-11-2026, 10:35 AM
          0 responses
          24 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Started by SEQadmin2, 08-06-2026, 07:41 AM
          0 responses
          38 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Started by SEQadmin2, 08-03-2026, 10:13 AM
          0 responses
          51 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Working...