Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • mido1951
    Senior Member
    • May 2014
    • 123

    comparaison to the reference genome

    Hello,
    I generated reads a file (.fasta) I want to test the effectiveness of my file to the reference genome (before assembly).
    how to do?
    and what tool I have to use it to make the comparison of my file with the reference genome?
    Thank you
  • Brian Bushnell
    Super Moderator
    • Jan 2014
    • 2709

    #2
    I suggest using Quast; it will compare your assembly to the reference. If you mean that you want to compare reads to an assembly, then you should use mapping, and a tool like ALE.

    Comment

    • mido1951
      Senior Member
      • May 2014
      • 123

      #3
      Originally posted by Brian Bushnell View Post
      I suggest using Quast; it will compare your assembly to the reference. If you mean that you want to compare reads to an assembly, then you should use mapping, and a tool like ALE.
      to compare read file to the reference genome i should use mapping tools?
      like ALE?
      thanks

      Comment

      • Brian Bushnell
        Super Moderator
        • Jan 2014
        • 2709

        #4
        If you want to compare reads, then map them, and then use ALE.

        Comment

        • mido1951
          Senior Member
          • May 2014
          • 123

          #5
          hello,
          i used BBMAP for mapping and this is the results:
          Code:
             ------------------   Results   ------------------
          
          Genome:                 1
          Key Length:             13
          Max Indel:              16000
          Minimum Score Ratio:    0.56
          Mapping Mode:           normal
          Reads Used:             1626223 (793501894 bases)
          
          Mapping:                21520.101 seconds.
          Reads/sec:              75.57
          kBases/sec:             36.87
          
          
          Read 1 data:            pct reads       num reads       pct bases          num bases
          
          mapped:                  84.1693%         1368781        84.7943%          672844516
          unambiguous:             75.6937%         1230949        76.2771%          605259839
          ambiguous:                8.4756%          137832         8.5173%           67584677
          low-Q discards:           0.0000%               0         0.0000%                  0
          
          perfect best site:       72.2714%         1175294        73.8835%          586267084
          semiperfect site:        72.2780%         1175402        73.8902%          586320010
          
          Match Rate:                   NA               NA        94.7978%          668713525
          Error Rate:              13.8973%          193385         5.1976%           36664236
          Sub Rate:                12.5303%          174364         0.2647%            1867550
          Del Rate:                 6.0770%           84563         4.6165%           32565546
          Ins Rate:                 5.8459%           81348         0.3163%            2231140
          N Rate:                   0.0630%             877         0.0046%              32301
          do i have good results or not?
          and can explain these lines?
          thanks

          Comment

          • mido1951
            Senior Member
            • May 2014
            • 123

            #6
            any response?

            Comment

            • Brian Bushnell
              Super Moderator
              • Jan 2014
              • 2709

              #7
              First off, it is very important to clearly explain what you did. Mapping reads to their assembly is different than mapping to a reference; which did you do? And if you have a reference, what are you making reads and assemblies for? Is this a different strain, different species, or what? What kind of data do you have, from which platform?

              Those numbers are very useful when trying to determine which is a better assembly of two assemblies from the same reads, or which is a better set of reads when you have two libraries made from the same organism. However, it's hard to determine the absolute quality of an assembly just from the mapping results, since you don't know whether the mismatches are caused by misassemblies or low-quality data, or how much contamination there is, etc. The fact that 72.27% of the reads match the assembly perfectly is nice. But the fact that only 84.17% of the reads map to the assembly indicates that it is probably incomplete.

              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
              20 views
              0 reactions
              Last Post SEQadmin2  
              Started by SEQadmin2, 07-09-2026, 10:04 AM
              0 responses
              31 views
              0 reactions
              Last Post SEQadmin2  
              Started by SEQadmin2, 07-08-2026, 10:08 AM
              0 responses
              20 views
              0 reactions
              Last Post SEQadmin2  
              Started by SEQadmin2, 07-07-2026, 11:05 AM
              0 responses
              34 views
              0 reactions
              Last Post SEQadmin2  
              Working...