Yes, the problem was solved the following way:
First, after demultiplexing the RAD-seq data, I ran the denovo_map of stacks. I specified "F2" as the cross (option -A). Depending on the cross that was performed choose the one corresponding to your data. I think this was my problem. I didn't choose the right cross thinking I had another type of data. Once that confusion was sorted, everything started to work.
After running deno_map.pl I ran the genotypes program the following way:
genotypes -b 1 -P . -r 7 -t F2 -o onemap -c
This allowed me to get the genotypes for each marker and of each progeny sample in the onemap format.
Then I ran onemap to build linkage groups and order the markers:
This is what I got:
> F2 <- read.mapmaker(file="for-onemap-analysis.txt")
--Read the following data:
Type of cross: f2
Number of individuals: 95
Number of markers: 1329
> twopts.f2 <- rf.2pts(F2)
> mark.all <- make.seq(twopts.f2, "all")
> (LGs <- group(mark.all, LOD=20, max.rf=0.5))
This is an object of class 'group'
It was generated from the object "mark.all"
Criteria used to assign markers to groups:
LOD = 20 , Maximum recombination fraction = 0.5
No. markers: 1329
No. groups: 7
No. linked markers: 1294
No. unlinked markers: 35
With this LOD/max.rf I built 7 groups (and I know this is the number of chromosome of my species). These groups contain most of the markers. I then continued the analysis: ordered the markers using the RECORD method, cleaned the map using R/QTL (with R/QTL you can remove duplicate markers and samples, remove markers/samples with a lot of missing data, look at the segregation distortion...).
I hope this helps. Ah, I also re-ran the stacks ref_map.pl pipeline and it gave me the same result (the maps from the denovo_map.pl and from ref_map.pl are extremely similar).
Best,
Sophie
Seqanswers Leaderboard Ad
Collapse
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
-
Hi standonn,
I have the same problem. Do you have a solution now?
Leave a comment:
-
Thanks for answering! I'll follow your advice and post my question on the Stacks forum. Thanks for the link!
Leave a comment:
-
You could write your question to the Stacks Google group (https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/stacks-users). Julian is pretty responsive.
I'd say it is normal to increase the number of unlinked markers as you increase the LOD score stringency. I don't know if your numbers look typical though.
Leave a comment:
-
Building a genetic map from RAD-seq using OneMap
Dear all,
I have some RAD-seq data from 2 parents and 97 offsprings. I would like to use this data to cluster my genomic scaffolds into linkage groups. I'm new to handling RAD-seq data and I'm not sure if what I'm doing is correct.
For the moment I have done the following:
- Quality Control of the RAD-seq reads
- Demultiplexed the files
- Mapped the RAD-seq reads to the genomic scaffolds (Bowtie2 + Samtools)
- Ran the ref_map.pl pipeline of Stacks, specifying a "onemap" output from the program "genotypes"
- Followed the tutorial step of OneMap (https://cran.r-project.org/web/packa...ed_version.pdf)
Now here is where things start not working: as I increase the LOD value, I get more linkage groups but I also increase the number of unlinked markers.
For example, with LOD=6, I get:
> groups
This is an object of class 'group'
It was generated from the object "all.mark"
Criteria used to assign markers to groups:
LOD = 6 , Maximum recombination fraction = 0.5
No. markers: 1342
No. groups: 1
No. linked markers: 901
No. unlinked markers: 441
With LOD=20, I get:
> groups
This is an object of class 'group'
It was generated from the object "all.mark"
Criteria used to assign markers to groups:
LOD = 20 , Maximum recombination fraction = 0.5
No. markers: 1342
No. groups: 9
No. linked markers: 225
No. unlinked markers: 1117
Is it normal to lose so many markers? What am I doing wrong?
Also some groups (with LOD=20), only have 2 markers which I guess is insufficient to have a good genetic map.
Any help or insight about building a genetic map using RAD-seq highly appreciated!
Cheers!
Latest Articles
Collapse
-
by seqadmin
Like all molecular biology applications, next-generation sequencing (NGS) workflows require diligent quality control (QC) measures to ensure accurate and reproducible results. Proper QC begins at nucleic acid extraction and continues all the way through to data analysis. This article outlines the key QC steps in an NGS workflow, along with the commonly used tools and techniques.
Nucleic Acid Quality Control
Preparing for NGS starts with isolating the...-
Channel: Articles
02-10-2025, 01:58 PM -
-
by seqadmin
In recent years, precision medicine has become a major focus for researchers and healthcare professionals. This approach offers personalized treatment and wellness plans by utilizing insights from each person's unique biology and lifestyle to deliver more effective care. Its advancement relies on innovative technologies that enable a deeper understanding of individual variability. In a joint documentary with our colleagues at Biocompare, we examined the foundational principles of precision...-
Channel: Articles
01-27-2025, 07:46 AM -
ad_right_rmr
Collapse
News
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Genetic Mapping of Plasmodium knowlesi Identifies Essential Genes and Drug Resistance Mechanisms
by seqadmin
Started by seqadmin, 02-07-2025, 09:30 AM
|
0 responses
67 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seqadmin
02-07-2025, 09:30 AM
|
||
Started by seqadmin, 02-05-2025, 10:34 AM
|
0 responses
104 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seqadmin
02-05-2025, 10:34 AM
|
||
Started by seqadmin, 02-03-2025, 09:07 AM
|
0 responses
83 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seqadmin
02-03-2025, 09:07 AM
|
||
Started by seqadmin, 01-31-2025, 08:31 AM
|
0 responses
45 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seqadmin
01-31-2025, 08:31 AM
|
Leave a comment: