Seqanswers Leaderboard Ad

Collapse

Announcement

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

  • removal of organelle data

    Is removal of organelle data necessary before determining the level of duplication in transcriptomics data and their removal? Why it is necessary?

  • #2
    Removal of organelle reads is not necessary. But it can make your job more efficient if a huge amount of your reads came from organelles that you don't care about.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Brian Bushnell View Post
      Removal of organelle reads is not necessary. But it can make your job more efficient if a huge amount of your reads came from organelles that you don't care about.
      Thanks for reply. Does this removal affect the final analysis for differential gene expression? I want to analyze organelle gene expression also, along with nuclear genes.

      Comment


      • #4
        If you are interested in differential expression of organelle genes, then clearly you should not remove them! If you wish to know the overall expression of both nuclear and organelle genes, and consider RNA content a proxy for their activity, it does not make sense to me to process them independently. But, maybe a biologist will chime in and correct me on that; perhaps the expression of nuclear and organelle transcripts are very different and should be processed independently.

        My prior answer that "removal of organelle reads is not necessary" was based on the fact that chloroplast and mitochondrial reads don't pose much of a problem to my institution - it's convenient, but not necessary (and usually very difficult), to separate organelle and nuclear reads prior to assembly. For RNA-seq, it seems to me a waste of time and counterproductive if you want to analyze differential expression of both nuclear and organelle genes, but again, I'll defer to biologists.

        Comment


        • #5
          best practices for organellar ID and purging?

          Hi Brian-- Any tips on pipelines or documents that describe the best way to evaluate (and possibly purge) the organellar content of a batch of reads? (Googling didn't get me as far as I was expecting it would.) It seems to be a problem of variable magnitude and, as you say, sometimes has a big impact on the results of using the non-organellar content.

          Thanks! -- Jonathan

          Originally posted by Brian Bushnell View Post
          If you are interested in differential expression of organelle genes, then clearly you should not remove them! If you wish to know the overall expression of both nuclear and organelle genes, and consider RNA content a proxy for their activity, it does not make sense to me to process them independently. But, maybe a biologist will chime in and correct me on that; perhaps the expression of nuclear and organelle transcripts are very different and should be processed independently.

          My prior answer that "removal of organelle reads is not necessary" was based on the fact that chloroplast and mitochondrial reads don't pose much of a problem to my institution - it's convenient, but not necessary (and usually very difficult), to separate organelle and nuclear reads prior to assembly. For RNA-seq, it seems to me a waste of time and counterproductive if you want to analyze differential expression of both nuclear and organelle genes, but again, I'll defer to biologists.

          Comment


          • #6
            If you have organelle references and a main genome reference, you can try using BBMap's BBSplit or Seal to fractionate the reads between them or generate stats about how many reads go with each one. BBSplit is probably more accurate and alignment-based, while Seal is faster and kmer-based. Example:

            Code:
            bbsplit.sh ref=genome.fa,mito.fa,chloro.fa in=reads.fq basename=out_%.fq refstats=refstats.txt
            The weakness of the approach is that some genes (such as ribosomes) may be duplicated between the organelles and main genome, in which case you can't cleanly separate them. But it should work for the majority of the genome.

            If you don't have references, you can still attempt fractionation based on kmer-coverage, at least for mitochondrial reads. I've done this successfully to assemble fungal mitochondria from raw fungal reads like this:

            Code:
            #First link reference as ref.fa and reads as reads.fq.gz
            
            kmercountexact.sh in=reads.fq.gz khist=khist_raw.txt peaks=peaks_raw.txt
            
            primary=`grep "haploid_fold_coverage" peaks_raw.txt | sed "s/^.*\t//g"`
            cutoff=$(( $primary * 3 ))
            
            bbnorm.sh in=reads.fq.gz out=highpass.fq.gz pigz passes=1 bits=16 min=$cutoff target=9999999
            reformat.sh in=highpass.fq.gz out=highpass_gc.fq.gz maxgc=0.45
            
            kmercountexact.sh in=highpass_gc.fq.gz khist=khist_100.txt k=100 peaks=peaks_100.txt smooth ow smoothradius=1 maxradius=1000 progressivemult=1.06 maxpeaks=16 prefilter=2
            
            mitopeak=`grep "main_peak" peaks_100.txt | sed "s/^.*\t//g"`
            
            upper=$((mitopeak * 6 / 3))
            lower=$((mitopeak * 3 / 7))
            mcs=$((mitopeak * 3 / 4))
            mincov=$((mitopeak * 2 / 3))
            
            tadwrapper.sh in=highpass_gc.fq.gz out=contigs_intermediate_%.fa k=78,100,120 outfinal=contigs_intermediate.fa prefilter=2 mincr=$lower maxcr=$upper mcs=$mcs mincov=$mincov
            
            bbduk.sh in=highpass.fq.gz ref=contigs_intermediate.fa outm=bbd005.fq.gz k=31 mm=f mkf=0.05
            
            tadpole.sh in=bbd005.fq.gz out=contigs_bbd.fa prefilter=2 mincr=$((mitopeak * 3 / 8)) maxcr=$((upper * 2)) mcs=$mcs mincov=$mincov k=100 bm1=6
            
            ln -s contigs_bbd.fa contigs.fa
            This is an attempt at an automatic solution to use for a large number of libraries, which usually worked pretty well, but manually deciding the coverage boundaries of the main peak might work better if you only have a single library to deal with. Not sure if chloroplasts have enough copies to make their peak stand out clearly from main genome repeats.
            Last edited by Brian Bushnell; 08-09-2017, 03:52 PM.

            Comment

            Latest Articles

            Collapse

            • seqadmin
              Recent Developments in Metagenomics
              by seqadmin





              Metagenomics has improved the way researchers study microorganisms across diverse environments. Historically, studying microorganisms relied on culturing them in the lab, a method that limits the investigation of many species since most are unculturable1. Metagenomics overcomes these issues by allowing the study of microorganisms regardless of their ability to be cultured or the environments they inhabit. Over time, the field has evolved, especially with the advent...
              09-23-2024, 06:35 AM
            • seqadmin
              Understanding Genetic Influence on Infectious Disease
              by seqadmin




              During the COVID-19 pandemic, scientists observed that while some individuals experienced severe illness when infected with SARS-CoV-2, others were barely affected. These disparities left researchers and clinicians wondering what causes the wide variations in response to viral infections and what role genetics plays.

              Jean-Laurent Casanova, M.D., Ph.D., Professor at Rockefeller University, is a leading expert in this crossover between genetics and infectious...
              09-09-2024, 10:59 AM

            ad_right_rmr

            Collapse

            News

            Collapse

            Topics Statistics Last Post
            Started by seqadmin, 10-02-2024, 04:51 AM
            0 responses
            8 views
            0 likes
            Last Post seqadmin  
            Started by seqadmin, 10-01-2024, 07:10 AM
            0 responses
            14 views
            0 likes
            Last Post seqadmin  
            Started by seqadmin, 09-30-2024, 08:33 AM
            0 responses
            18 views
            0 likes
            Last Post seqadmin  
            Started by seqadmin, 09-26-2024, 12:57 PM
            0 responses
            16 views
            0 likes
            Last Post seqadmin  
            Working...
            X