Seqanswers Leaderboard Ad

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • nilshomer
    replied
    Originally posted by NanYu View Post
    I'm wondering in the postprocess step, if BFAST will do something like: choose the best for F and second best for R within a pair because that is within the expected distance, yet the best for R is in another chromsome.
    I know it is a rare scenario and maybe I should not worry about it.
    It could happen when using the insert size distance in the probability calculation, though it is rare.

    Leave a comment:


  • nilshomer
    replied
    Originally posted by guo View Post
    Hi. everyone.

    Should we transform the fastq file from solid2fastq (Bfast) before mapping with bwa?
    I mean from "0123123" to "ACTGACT", something likewise plus some other format issues?

    Before, I proced without any transformation, then got malformed .sai file and some "segmentation fault" which I haven't specified yet.

    Any suggestions? Thank you
    Make sure you use the solid2fastq within BWA if you are going to use BWA. On the other hand, if you are using bfast+bwa, make sure you see the command line parameters in BFAST's solid2fastq.

    Leave a comment:


  • guo
    replied
    Hi. everyone.

    Should we transform the fastq file from solid2fastq (Bfast) before mapping with bwa?
    I mean from "0123123" to "ACTGACT", something likewise plus some other format issues?

    Before, I proced without any transformation, then got malformed .sai file and some "segmentation fault" which I haven't specified yet.

    Any suggestions? Thank you

    Leave a comment:


  • NanYu
    replied
    Originally posted by nilshomer View Post
    Good point, the manual and binaries are not in sync. Try "bfast postprocess -h".
    Saw them now.

    Thanks for your help! I will try them now.

    -v insertSizeAvg Specifies the mean insert size to use when rescuing
    -s insertSizeStdDev Specifies the standard deviation of the insert size to use when rescuing

    Leave a comment:


  • nilshomer
    replied
    Good point, the manual and binaries are not in sync. Try "bfast postprocess -h".

    Leave a comment:


  • NanYu
    replied
    Originally posted by nilshomer View Post
    See "-v" and "-s". Make sure you have latest BFAST.

    Nils
    Hi, Nils:

    The version I have is 0.6.5a and the bfast-book.pdf I am reading also shows "version 0.6.5a" but I could not find -v option and -s is common parameter and has nothing to do with insertion size.

    "-s INTEGER, --startReadNum=INTEGER
    Specifies the first read in which to process. This may be useful when distributing a large data set across a cluster."

    Maybe I didn't get things right?

    Leave a comment:


  • nilshomer
    replied
    See "-v" and "-s". Make sure you have latest BFAST.

    Nils

    Leave a comment:


  • NanYu
    replied
    Originally posted by nilshomer View Post
    It may take a very long time to run. Note that "-S" is the standard deviation, not the mean (etc.).

    The best way, as a scientist, to find out these answers is to try it out for yourself! I cannot predict the behavior
    Thanks!
    It did takes much longer time to run (compared to use "-U") option.

    There is no option for me to tell BFAST at the postprocess step the expected insertion size (or range of the insertion size) for pair-end sequences.

    Maybe what I should do is to use "-U" and use a perl script to look for column #8 in the sam file and separate the results according to the value of #8 (and other information). By doing so, it means this information (expected insertion size) is wasted when using BFAST to map the paired-end sequences.

    Leave a comment:


  • nilshomer
    replied
    It may take a very long time to run. Note that "-S" is the standard deviation, not the mean (etc.).

    The best way, as a scientist, to find out these answers is to try it out for yourself! I cannot predict the behavior

    Leave a comment:


  • NanYu
    replied
    Originally posted by nilshomer View Post
    Yes, that is a possibility with any pairing step.
    Thanks!

    As mentioned above, if we are expecting ~1.5kb (insertion size, from the lab protocol) , do you think if I set "-S 3000" (very loose criteria) is an OK value for "-S"?

    I saw the "-v 160 -s 20 " in #3 but could not find them in the BFAST manual (postprocess section). Could you please let me know what they are?

    I really appreciate your help in this forum.

    Leave a comment:


  • nilshomer
    replied
    Yes, that is a possibility with any pairing step.

    Leave a comment:


  • NanYu
    replied
    Originally posted by Chipper View Post
    The problem seems to be the estmation of distances and standar deviations. If you set these parameters it will be much faster.

    you mean I should provide a value for "-S"?
    We are expecting ~1.5kb, so should I set "-S 3000" (allow the distance to be a bit bigger).

    Thanks!

    Leave a comment:


  • NanYu
    replied
    Originally posted by nilshomer View Post
    I am not sure why you are concerned. Did you look at the data and see something odd?

    I'm wondering in the postprocess step, if BFAST will do something like: choose the best for F and second best for R within a pair because that is within the expected distance, yet the best for R is in another chromsome.
    I know it is a rare scenario and maybe I should not worry about it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chipper
    replied
    The problem seems to be the estmation of distances and standar deviations. If you set these parameters it will be much faster.

    Leave a comment:


  • nilshomer
    replied
    Originally posted by NanYu View Post
    with the -U option added, it finished within 1 min!
    but it means BFAST will not consider the results for "mated-pair".
    It means that it will not try the mate-pair rescue strategy, but it will be annotated as mate pair in the SAM file (check the flag field).

    Originally posted by NanYu View Post
    How much it will affect the final result (compared with not using -U option)?
    It should affect it by 42. On a serious note, I don't know how much it will affect your results. Please post back if you notice an interesting difference.

    Originally posted by NanYu View Post
    If I use the -U option, may I use the SAMTools or other software to further filter the result before SNP discovery?
    Thanks!
    I am not sure why you are concerned. Did you look at the data and see something odd?

    Leave a comment:

Latest Articles

Collapse

  • seqadmin
    The Impact of AI in Genomic Medicine
    by seqadmin



    Artificial intelligence (AI) has evolved from a futuristic vision to a mainstream technology, highlighted by the introduction of tools like OpenAI's ChatGPT and Google's Gemini. In recent years, AI has become increasingly integrated into the field of genomics. This integration has enabled new scientific discoveries while simultaneously raising important ethical questions1. Interviews with two researchers at the center of this intersection provide insightful perspectives into...
    02-26-2024, 02:07 PM
  • seqadmin
    Multiomics Techniques Advancing Disease Research
    by seqadmin


    New and advanced multiomics tools and technologies have opened new avenues of research and markedly enhanced various disciplines such as disease research and precision medicine1. The practice of merging diverse data from various ‘omes increasingly provides a more holistic understanding of biological systems. As Maddison Masaeli, Co-Founder and CEO at Deepcell, aptly noted, “You can't explain biology in its complex form with one modality.”

    A major leap in the field has
    ...
    02-08-2024, 06:33 AM

ad_right_rmr

Collapse

News

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by seqadmin, 02-28-2024, 06:12 AM
0 responses
27 views
0 likes
Last Post seqadmin  
Started by seqadmin, 02-23-2024, 04:11 PM
0 responses
74 views
0 likes
Last Post seqadmin  
Started by seqadmin, 02-21-2024, 08:52 AM
0 responses
81 views
0 likes
Last Post seqadmin  
Started by seqadmin, 02-20-2024, 08:57 AM
0 responses
69 views
0 likes
Last Post seqadmin  
Working...
X