Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • NM_010117
    Member
    • Oct 2010
    • 14

    #1

    Bowtie and Tophat in disagreement with alignment

    Hi all,

    I had a question about running bowtie and tophat. If I run bowtie (flags: -p 4 -S --un -v 3; paired-end) independently of tophat, I get very different results when looking at what % of the reads were mapped to my reference genome (hg18). Bowtie by itself aligns 38,474,274 of 87,783,858 reads to hg18, whereas when tophat is run (flags: -p 4 -r 20; paired-end) it maps 69,190,587 reads. Does anyone have an idea why they would differ so greatly?

    The data is 76bp paired end from cancer patients done on the GAIIx.
  • ZhengXia
    Member
    • Feb 2009
    • 10

    #2
    Tophat will map more reads than Bowtie because Tophat detects the splicing junction first which will make the reads spanning junctions mappable.
    Originally posted by NM_010117 View Post
    Hi all,

    I had a question about running bowtie and tophat. If I run bowtie (flags: -p 4 -S --un -v 3; paired-end) independently of tophat, I get very different results when looking at what % of the reads were mapped to my reference genome (hg18). Bowtie by itself aligns 38,474,274 of 87,783,858 reads to hg18, whereas when tophat is run (flags: -p 4 -r 20; paired-end) it maps 69,190,587 reads. Does anyone have an idea why they would differ so greatly?

    The data is 76bp paired end from cancer patients done on the GAIIx.

    Comment

    • NM_010117
      Member
      • Oct 2010
      • 14

      #3
      That makes sense, but surely it shouldn't have such a large impact that it doubles the number of reads aligned to the genome?

      Comment

      • kmcarr
        Senior Member
        • May 2008
        • 1181

        #4
        Originally posted by NM_010117 View Post
        That makes sense, but surely it shouldn't have such a large impact that it doubles the number of reads aligned to the genome?
        You observations sound perfectly in agreement with what I would expect. The average size of a exon in the human genome is 200bp. Your reads are 76nt. If the leftmost mapping position of a read is < 76bp from the end of the exon it will fail to map using bowtie. This 76bp "dead window" if you will represents 38% of the average exon length. You observed a reduction of 44%; you're in the ballbark.

        Comment

        • NM_010117
          Member
          • Oct 2010
          • 14

          #5
          Originally posted by kmcarr View Post
          You observations sound perfectly in agreement with what I would expect. The average size of a exon in the human genome is 200bp. Your reads are 76nt. If the leftmost mapping position of a read is < 76bp from the end of the exon it will fail to map using bowtie. This 76bp "dead window" if you will represents 38% of the average exon length. You observed a reduction of 44%; you're in the ballbark.
          Ah ha! Ok, that makes perfect sense. So tophat and bowtie are more or less in agreement with eachother; I'm just interpreting the results incorrectly. Well, at least it's promising to know that the mapping was done correctly at least.

          Thanks for the help.

          Comment

          Latest Articles

          Collapse

          • SEQadmin2
            Multiomic Liquid Biopsy: What DNA/RNA Panels Reveal That DNA Alone Can’t
            by SEQadmin2



            Tumors contain complex mixtures of cell populations that evolve in response to treatment and host-specific factors. Tissue biopsies provide only static snapshots of a tumor’s state. But what if we could follow that evolution over time using a minimally invasive technique?

            Liquid biopsies can detect tumor-derived material circulating in the bloodstream, providing a way to study treatment response, detect emerging resistance, and discover new biomarkers. Circulating
            ...
            10-14-2026, 09:55 AM
          • SEQadmin2
            New Genomics Technologies Take Aim at Long-Standing Limits
            by SEQadmin2


            Researchers using sequencing and genomics tools often have to make trade-offs. They can choose between speed or scale, short reads or long-range information, or targeted panels or a view of the whole transcriptome. New technologies that have been released this year are built to address those tough choices.

            We asked six companies the same four questions to learn about their latest products. The new technologies bring a lot to the table, including rethinking sequencing
            ...
            09-28-2026, 10:25 AM

          ad_right_rmr

          Collapse

          News

          Collapse

          Topics Statistics Last Post
          Started by SEQadmin2, 10-15-2026, 10:52 AM
          0 responses
          12 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Started by SEQadmin2, 10-14-2026, 05:39 AM
          0 responses
          20 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Started by SEQadmin2, 10-13-2026, 09:56 AM
          0 responses
          19 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Started by SEQadmin2, 10-09-2026, 11:14 AM
          0 responses
          27 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Working...