Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • DrWorm
    Member
    • Apr 2013
    • 17

    Comparing Cassava1.8.2 to bcl2fastq

    Hello all,

    A colleague of mine used Cassava1.8.2 and bcl2fastq to convert the same bcl file to fastq format. I was tasked with proving that the two resulting fastq files (again, the same data from the machine, just different software used to convert to fastq) are identical (i.e., the same sequence, the same quality score for each read). I noticed that some of the quality scores were indeed slightly different.

    File 1:
    @HWI-Read1_deidentified_name
    CCAAGTCTCGCTTACTTTTCATGTCATCCCGTGCCTTCTCCGAGAGGGTTCGCAGGTTCATGTTTTCAAAGATGCTAATGGACGTAGCCCAGGCCAGCGAT
    +
    0<@<DEEG<DCC<E?CFHHHHHEHHIIHHH@<EEH?FHH11C/<<?@EHICDH=C<FH1FEHHIIH@1111FHIHHEG@1<CG<CH@H1<CCC1<<<?C/1


    File 2:
    @HWI-Read1_deidentified_name
    CCAAGTCTCGCTTACTTTTCATGTCATCCCGTGCCTTCTCCGAGAGGGTTCGCAGGTTCATGTTTTCAAAGATGCTAATGGACGTAGCCCAGGCCAGCGAT
    +
    0<@<DEEG<DCC<E?CFHHHHHEHHIIHHH@<EEH?FHH11C/<<?@EHICDH=C<FH1FEHHIIH@1111FHIHHEG@1<CG<CH@H1<CCC1<<<?C##


    See the difference? Its minor, typically towards the end of the read, typically affecting poor~ish quality bases.

    Does anyone have an idea of what might cause this?
  • kmcarr
    Senior Member
    • May 2008
    • 1181

    #2
    Which version of bcl2fastq was used? Casava 1.8.2 is really using bcl2fastq 1.8.2 for demultiplexing. Was the same "standalone" bcl2fastq version used or was it 1.8.4 or the newer 2.x bcl2fastq?

    Comment

    • DrWorm
      Member
      • Apr 2013
      • 17

      #3
      I'm told it was bcl2fastq2 2.17.

      Comment

      • GenoMax
        Senior Member
        • Feb 2008
        • 7142

        #4
        What kind of sequencer is this data from?

        There isn't a way to directly compare bcl2fastq v.2 with CASAVA v.1.8.2 since they can't be used interchangeably (bcl2fastq v.2 can be used for all data but CASAVA can't be used for NextSeq and HiSeq 3K/4K/X data).

        Comment

        • HESmith
          Senior Member
          • Oct 2009
          • 512

          #5
          Is the difference always a string of quality 2 ('#') at the 3' end of reads? At some point, Illumina used Q2 as an "low quality end-of-read, do not use" indicator.

          Comment

          • DrWorm
            Member
            • Apr 2013
            • 17

            #6
            Yeah, its mostly (if not all -- I just haven't tested thoroughly) #'s at the 3' end of reads. Seems like it shouldn't make much difference practically???

            Comment

            Latest Articles

            Collapse

            • 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
            • 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, Yesterday, 10:08 AM
            0 responses
            6 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Started by SEQadmin2, 07-07-2026, 11:05 AM
            0 responses
            8 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Started by SEQadmin2, 07-02-2026, 11:08 AM
            0 responses
            31 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Started by SEQadmin2, 06-30-2026, 05:37 AM
            0 responses
            29 views
            0 reactions
            Last Post SEQadmin2  
            Working...