Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • anu18
    Junior Member
    • Apr 2019
    • 3

    different output from bowtie2 and samtools flagstat

    Hello, I am new to bioinformatics and trying to analyse paired end RAD seq data. I have aligned the sequences using bowtie2 and have my output as sorted bam after piping the results straight into samtools. the output that I get for this std. output is different than samtools flagstat. Here is the output from aligner
    2170017 reads; of these:
    2170017 (100.00%) were paired; of these:
    608209 (28.03%) aligned concordantly 0 times
    994001 (45.81%) aligned concordantly exactly 1 time
    567807 (26.17%) aligned concordantly >1 times
    ----
    608209 pairs aligned concordantly 0 times; of these:
    49881 (8.20%) aligned discordantly 1 time
    ----
    558328 pairs aligned 0 times concordantly or discordantly; of these:
    1116656 mates make up the pairs; of these:
    488912 (43.78%) aligned 0 times
    232584 (20.83%) aligned exactly 1 time
    395160 (35.39%) aligned >1 times
    88.73% overall alignment rate

    and here is the output from flagstat

    2322547 + 0 in total (QC-passed reads + QC-failed reads)
    0 + 0 secondary
    0 + 0 supplementary
    0 + 0 duplicates
    2322547 + 0 mapped (100.00% : N/A)
    2322547 + 0 paired in sequencing
    1132936 + 0 read1
    1189611 + 0 read2
    2073092 + 0 properly paired (89.26% : N/A)
    2225207 + 0 with itself and mate mapped
    97340 + 0 singletons (4.19% : N/A)
    110386 + 0 with mate mapped to a different chr
    110386 + 0 with mate mapped to a different chr (mapQ>=5)

    these two are very different. Can someone help me in reconciling them. Also when i try to find the uniquely mapped reads using samtools
    samtools view -F 4 412_sorted.bam | grep -v "XS" | wc -l
    2139690
    I get this result which again is different from the bowtie output of aligned exactly 1 time. Can someone help me.

Latest Articles

Collapse

  • 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, 07-02-2026, 11:08 AM
0 responses
23 views
0 reactions
Last Post SEQadmin2  
Started by SEQadmin2, 06-30-2026, 05:37 AM
0 responses
23 views
0 reactions
Last Post SEQadmin2  
Started by SEQadmin2, 06-26-2026, 11:10 AM
0 responses
23 views
0 reactions
Last Post SEQadmin2  
Started by SEQadmin2, 06-17-2026, 06:09 AM
0 responses
55 views
0 reactions
Last Post SEQadmin2  
Working...