Seqanswers Leaderboard Ad

Collapse

Announcement

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

  • Brian Bushnell
    replied
    BBMap requires a reference; all of those histograms (other than bhist) are based on mapping. But it doesn't have to be a good assembly. If you have sufficient coverage, a quick draft assembly is adequate for mapping to generate that QC data.

    Leave a comment:


  • Zapages
    replied
    ^Is it possible to do quality control without a reference with bbmap?

    I have some Ion Xpress read data. I have been told the quality control has been done, but when just checked through FastQC, it seems really bad at the end. But then again its my first time working with Ion Torrent/PGM data.

    Thank you in advance for the help.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • Brian Bushnell
    replied
    I uploaded a new version of BBMap that can tell you the observed quality for claimed qualities, assuming you have a reference. You run it like this:

    bbmap.sh ref=x.fasta in=reads.fastq nodisk qahist=qahist.txt

    This will give 7 columns:
    quality, match, sub, insertion, deletion, observed quality, observed quality (subs only)

    Since deletions occur between bases, I add deletion events to bases neighboring the deletion. That would over-represent deletions, so all the other columns are multiplied by 2 to compensate. Anyway, if you plot the first column against the 6th column, it will tell you how the observed error rates correlate with quality scores.

    You can get QC-relevant additional histograms with these flags:

    bhist=bhist.txt (base composition by read position)
    qhist=qhist.txt (average quality by read position)
    mhist=mhist.txt (match, substitution, insertion, deletion events by read position)
    ihist=ihist.txt (insert size distribution)

    ...and if you want the actual mapped reads, just add "out=mapped.sam".

    Leave a comment:


  • GenoMax
    replied
    Originally posted by super0925 View Post
    My work is RNA-seq.
    So the trimming step sould be 'gentle' or even not which is suggested by some experts in SeqAnswers and Biostars. Am I right?
    Basically yes. Need for trimming can be evaluated based on the results you get after the first round of analysis.

    Leave a comment:


  • super0925
    replied
    Originally posted by GenoMax View Post
    I do not think it would be possible to equate Q-scores from Illumina/Ion by a formula because they are not using the same predictors.

    Some recent studies seem to suggest that trimming may not be needed unless adapters are present or the raw qualities are poor. I would suggest doing some analysis without trimming to see what happens. BTW, What kind of analysis are you doing (re-seq, RNA-seq etc)?
    My work is RNA-seq.
    So the trimming step sould be 'gentle' or even not which is suggested by some experts in SeqAnswers and Biostars. Am I right?

    Leave a comment:


  • GenoMax
    replied
    I do not think it would be possible to equate Q-scores from Illumina/Ion by a formula because they are not using the same predictors.

    Some recent studies seem to suggest that trimming may not be needed unless adapters are present or the raw qualities are poor. I would suggest doing some analysis without trimming to see what happens. BTW, What kind of analysis are you doing (re-seq, RNA-seq etc)?

    Leave a comment:


  • super0925
    replied
    Originally posted by GenoMax View Post
    @super0925: There is a technical note available on the ioncommunity site that describes six Quality Score predictors (and some additional ones that are apparently not listed) used for ion PGM. I did not see one specifically for proton but the one for PGM may work.

    You should be able to create a free account on ioncommunity site and search for that document.
    Thank you very much. I have seen that before.
    The Quality Score in Proton is based on the 6 predictors which are different from Illumina. Am I right?
    But I am still confused that the relationship between Proton Q score and Illumina Q score, like Q=22 Proton related to Q=30 MiSeq.
    So far I could only directly judge that OK Q>22 is good reads and Q<22 is required for trimming...... Am I right?

    Leave a comment:


  • GenoMax
    replied
    @super0925: There is a technical note available on the ioncommunity site that describes six Quality Score predictors (and some additional ones that are apparently not listed) used for ion PGM. I did not see one specifically for proton but the one for PGM may work.

    You should be able to create a free account on ioncommunity site and search for that document.

    Leave a comment:


  • mastal
    replied
    I think the error model for the IonProton would be more like that for 454, and involve homopolymer indels rather than substitutions.

    Leave a comment:


  • super0925
    replied
    Originally posted by snetmcom View Post
    These are raw quality scores, so only the manufacturers know how they are calculated. That is why platform comparisons at this level are not always the best method.
    Thank you!
    I agree with you. It is hard to say which machine (HiSeq/MiSeq/Proton) is better from QC score but I want to know the equivalent quality score in Proton .
    Like nbahlis said
    Illumina score 30 corresponding to Proton QC score 22
    So how about other score e.g. 20, 40 ?

    Leave a comment:


  • Brian Bushnell
    replied
    Originally posted by super0925 View Post
    Thank you!!! But I want to know the reason and why .
    e.g. How do they calculate the QC score? why lower than Illumina (is that different equation?)
    and, how to compare two measurement ?e,g, is that Illumina score -8 =Proton score?
    If you want to determine the true quality offset, then map the reads and count the mismatch rate of bases at each quality level. I have a tool that can do that from a sam file but it's not really ready for mainstream use yet. I used it to make this plot for some recent Illumina Hiseq 2000 data, which indicates they were under-calling qualities on that run.

    P.S. This only works if the error model is almost entirely substitutions. If IonTorrent reads have indels then it requires a bit more effort. I'm never used IonTorrent data.
    Attached Files
    Last edited by Brian Bushnell; 04-15-2014, 04:07 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • snetmcom
    replied
    Originally posted by super0925 View Post
    Thank you!!! But I want to know the reason and why .
    e.g. How do they calculate the QC score? why lower than Illumina (is that different equation?)
    and, how to compare two measurement ?e,g, is that Illumina score -8 =Proton score?
    These are raw quality scores, so only the manufacturers know how they are calculated. That is why platform comparisons at this level are not always the best method.

    Leave a comment:


  • super0925
    replied
    Originally posted by nbahlis View Post
    That is typical with the proton. We are told by lifetech that a22-24 score on the proton equals the 30 on the illumina platform. It has to do apparently withe the proton more conservative score calling.
    Thank you!!! But I want to know the reason and why .
    e.g. How do they calculate the QC score? why lower than Illumina (is that different equation?)
    and, how to compare two measurement ?e,g, is that Illumina score -8 =Proton score?
    Last edited by super0925; 04-15-2014, 05:06 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • nbahlis
    replied
    That is typical with the proton. We are told by lifetech that a22-24 score on the proton equals the 30 on the illumina platform. It has to do apparently withe the proton more conservative score calling.

    Leave a comment:


  • super0925
    started a topic QC control

    QC control

    Hi all
    Does proton has its own supported QC control measurement?
    My reads quality looks very strange (I get this result by FASTQC software which is Illumina-based).
    In Illumina we know that QC= -10*log10(p)>30 is good reads but Proton seems strange.
    Does anybody know that how to measure it in Proton? Thank you!
    Attached Files
    Last edited by super0925; 04-15-2014, 03:34 AM.

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
26 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