Seqanswers Leaderboard Ad
Collapse
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
-
Because technical replicates could have different insert sizes, and the average (or estimated) insert size can have an effect on alignment, you may get different results even for technical replicates between merging prior to mapping versus merging after mapping. In many cases this difference is trivial and in general mapping the reads independently is not guaranteed to give you an optimal answer with respect to insert size anyway, since there is an order dependency, but it's something to be aware of.
-
Originally posted by linudz View PostThank you very much for your answer. This is going to be done on replicates of the same sample, so it should apply. Thanks again
Leave a comment:
-
Thank you very much for your answer. This is going to be done on replicates of the same sample, so it should apply. Thanks again
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by linudz View PostHi folks, I have a question on how to better merge paired-end reads coming from different samples. Basically, we do align genome resequencing fastq with bwa mem, and compress the resulting .sam file into a .bam.
If we have to merge two different samples, there are basically two ways. The first is to merge the fastqs and align the resulting file, the second is to make use of samtools merge to merge the .bam files.
My concern is whether the two procedures are equally valid, or there is some relevant difference in the outcome.
Note: When you are referencing "merging samples" are you referring to technical replicates of the same sample? Merging would be appropriate only in that case. If "samples" are true biological replicates then you would want to keep them separate for downstream analysis.
but I still wonder if the number of reads affects the results of the alignment, or each read is aligned independently.
Can anyone give me more insights on this?
Leave a comment:
-
A question on Illumina paired-end reads alignment. Merging from different samples
Hi folks, I have a question on how to better merge paired-end reads coming from different samples. Basically, we do align genome resequencing fastq with bwa mem, and compress the resulting .sam file into a .bam.
If we have to merge two different samples, there are basically two ways. The first is to merge the fastqs and align the resulting file, the second is to make use of samtools merge to merge the .bam files.
My concern is whether the two procedures are equally valid, or there is some relevant difference in the outcome.
I think that everything revolves around the functioning of the Burrows Wheeler Transform Alignment. I have broadly understood the application of the BWT and of the indexing, but I still wonder if the number of reads affects the results of the alignment, or each read is aligned independently.
Can anyone give me more insights on this?
Latest Articles
Collapse
-
by seqadmin
Proteins are often described as the workhorses of the cell, and identifying their sequences is key to understanding their role in biological processes and disease. Currently, the most common technique used to determine protein sequences is mass spectrometry. While still a valuable tool, mass spectrometry faces several limitations and requires a highly experienced scientist familiar with the equipment to operate it. Additionally, other proteomic methods, like affinity assays, are constrained...-
Channel: Articles
04-04-2024, 04:25 PM -
-
by seqadmin
Despite advancements in sequencing platforms and related sample preparation technologies, certain sample types continue to present significant challenges that can compromise sequencing results. Pedro Echave, Senior Manager of the Global Business Segment at Revvity, explained that the success of a sequencing experiment ultimately depends on the amount and integrity of the nucleic acid template (RNA or DNA) obtained from a sample. “The better the quality of the nucleic acid isolated...-
Channel: Articles
03-22-2024, 06:39 AM -
ad_right_rmr
Collapse
News
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by seqadmin, 04-11-2024, 12:08 PM
|
0 responses
31 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seqadmin
04-11-2024, 12:08 PM
|
||
Started by seqadmin, 04-10-2024, 10:19 PM
|
0 responses
33 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seqadmin
04-10-2024, 10:19 PM
|
||
Started by seqadmin, 04-10-2024, 09:21 AM
|
0 responses
28 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seqadmin
04-10-2024, 09:21 AM
|
||
Started by seqadmin, 04-04-2024, 09:00 AM
|
0 responses
53 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seqadmin
04-04-2024, 09:00 AM
|
Leave a comment: