Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • rhall
    replied
    The alignment and quiver correction will use the post filter reads. P_Filter only happens once, and all downstream analysis use these results.
    The targetChunks will have a small effect on the results, but not in any significant way. It relates to the splitting up of the first alignment of all reads to the seed reads, in order to optimize computation. The defaults should be reasonable for bacterial assemblies, if you increase the size of genome you are assembling the number of targetChunks will have to be increased. The splitBestn is the number of alignments allowed for each read within the alignment chunk, the totalBestn is the total across all chunks.

    Leave a comment:


  • ymc
    replied
    I found that I can improve preassembled yield of P6C4 just by changing targetChunks to 1 and splitBestn to the same value as totalBestn which is 24.

    Polymerase Read Bases 779850648 Length Cutoff 21553
    Seed Bases 139264087 Pre-Assembled bases 50571157
    Pre-Assembled Yield 0.36313135776346994 Pre-Assembled Reads 6001
    Pre-Assembled Reads Length 8427 Pre-Assembled N50 15684

    But it ended up with broken contigs
    unitig_0|quiver 3838171
    unitig_1|quiver 828945
    unitig_2|quiver 33788

    Why was that? What does it do?

    Leave a comment:


  • ymc
    replied
    Originally posted by rhall View Post
    I just looked at the data with the latest version of SMRT Analysis 2.3.0 - patch 4 and it looks like the subreadlength distribution is such that the automatic calculation of the seed read length is being too aggressive. The resulting yield of preassembled reads is a little low to get a good assembly. If you un-check "Compute Minimum Seed Read Length" and set the seed length to 15000 the result is a single circular contig with overlapping ends that can be circularized.
    Note, although the ecoli is K12 it is not base for base the same as the published reference, some of the variations have been validated. You may want to check any differences between the assembly and the reference, in a lot of cases the assembly is correct it is just that the strain being sequences has diverged a little from the reference.
    Thank you for your reply. I will give that a try.

    I suppose "Pre-assembled Yield" is not that important but rather "Preassembled Bases" should be >25x of genomeSize, correct?

    Do you know for the quiver step in the HGAP pipeline, would the reads I filtered out at the P_Filter step be used for the quiver step? When I run quiver after PBcR, I always use all the reads to polish even if the input fastq to PBcR is what's left after filtering. It would be nice to know HGAP uses all the reads to correct but not just filtered reads.

    Leave a comment:


  • rhall
    replied
    I just looked at the data with the latest version of SMRT Analysis 2.3.0 - patch 4 and it looks like the subreadlength distribution is such that the automatic calculation of the seed read length is being too aggressive. The resulting yield of preassembled reads is a little low to get a good assembly. If you un-check "Compute Minimum Seed Read Length" and set the seed length to 15000 the result is a single circular contig with overlapping ends that can be circularized.
    Note, although the ecoli is K12 it is not base for base the same as the published reference, some of the variations have been validated. You may want to check any differences between the assembly and the reference, in a lot of cases the assembly is correct it is just that the strain being sequences has diverged a little from the reference.

    Leave a comment:


  • Brian Bushnell
    replied
    Originally posted by ymc View Post
    https://github.com/PacificBioscience...ary-with-P6-C4

    I was using the data I downloaded from pacbio. It is a 20kb size selected library. Does that mean I should filter out reads significantly longer than 20kb, e.g. filter out >30kb reads?
    No. Those are the most valuable reads. Size-selection is not perfect, and the goal in this case is mainly to aim for 20kbp+, anyway - not to prevent longer reads from being sequenced.

    Leave a comment:


  • ymc
    replied


    I was using the data I downloaded from pacbio. It is a 20kb size selected library. Does that mean I should filter out reads significantly longer than 20kb, e.g. filter out >30kb reads?

    Leave a comment:


  • rhall
    replied
    Something looks amiss with the P6C4 assembly / data, how is the loading for the cell, % P0, P1 and P2? Can you post the subread histogram. Can you provide any more information on how the libraries were prepped?

    Leave a comment:


  • ymc
    replied
    The P5C3 stat looks much better and satisfy all the criteria you mentioned:

    Polymerase Read Bases 373874428 Length Cutoff 13715
    Seed Bases 139256931 Pre-Assembled bases 113989293
    Pre-Assembled Yield 0.8185538212098039 Pre-Assembled Reads 8887
    Pre-Assembled Reads Length 12826 Pre-Assembled N50 15326

    I think improving Pre-Assembled bases can help my P6C4 but how can I do that?

    Leave a comment:


  • ymc
    replied
    Originally posted by rhall View Post
    From a lot of experience with HGAP and bacterial assembly, the one thing I can say is that it is extremely robust. Changing parameter will not have much of an affect on the quality of an assembly. Time is much better spent diagnosing why the assembly did not give the expected results with the default parameters.
    The first things to check are the PreAssembled read N50, Preassembled coverage (# Preassembled bases / genome size) and the preassembled yield. An N50 < 5kb will result in problems for many bacterial assemblies as you will not be able to span common repeats. A yield of <0.70 indicates that something is going wrong with the PreAssembly. The PreAssembled coverage should be >15x.
    Thanks a lot for your reply. My Pre-assembler report for P6C4 is:

    Polymerase Read Bases 779850648 Length Cutoff 21586
    Seed Bases 138056215 Pre-Assembled bases 44327787
    Pre-Assembled Yield 0.32108505220138045 Pre-Assembled Reads 4630
    Pre-Assembled Reads Length 9574 Pre-Assembled N50 16443

    Apparently, yield is 0.32<0.7 and Preassembled coverage is 9.63x<15x. How do I fix this? I basically use the example HGAP3 params.xml included in the package but I changed the genomeSize to 4600000.

    Leave a comment:


  • rhall
    replied
    From a lot of experience with HGAP and bacterial assembly, the one thing I can say is that it is extremely robust. Changing parameter will not have much of an affect on the quality of an assembly. Time is much better spent diagnosing why the assembly did not give the expected results with the default parameters.
    The first things to check are the PreAssembled read N50, Preassembled coverage (# Preassembled bases / genome size) and the preassembled yield. An N50 < 5kb will result in problems for many bacterial assemblies as you will not be able to span common repeats. A yield of <0.70 indicates that something is going wrong with the PreAssembly. The PreAssembled coverage should be >15x.

    Leave a comment:


  • ymc
    replied
    Originally posted by rhall View Post
    You can calculate a read score from the base QVs in the fastq, but it will not be exactly the same as the "Read Score" defined in the bax.h5.
    I would be careful using either the Read Score, or the QVs in the fastq for PacBio data, they are not well calibrated. Using either a 0.75, or 0.8 Read Score filters out a lot of junk reads, but I would not have a lot of confidence in it for distinguishing a 0.8 from a 0.82 read.
    Thanks for your reply. I once tried to increase the filter from 0.8 to 0.83 for a 80x E coli dataset but it made no differences in the assembly.

    I wanted to learn more about read score because I want to tweak parameters in my HGAP pipeline to improve the assembly but so far I tried changing minReadScore, xCoverage and minLongReadLength but nothing changed. The default filter filters out reads shorter than 500bp. Do you think increasing the cutoff can improve assembly?

    Leave a comment:


  • Brian Bushnell
    replied
    I mostly agree, in terms of raw data, that the QVs are not particularly useful. But they are quite useful in consensus (CCS, reads of insert, or error-corrected) data.

    Leave a comment:


  • rhall
    replied
    You can calculate a read score from the base QVs in the fastq, but it will not be exactly the same as the "Read Score" defined in the bax.h5.
    I would be careful using either the Read Score, or the QVs in the fastq for PacBio data, they are not well calibrated. Using either a 0.75, or 0.8 Read Score filters out a lot of junk reads, but I would not have a lot of confidence in it for distinguishing a 0.8 from a 0.82 read.

    Leave a comment:


  • Brian Bushnell
    replied
    I don't really use the SMRT pipeline, but you can use reformat to filter the fastq files based on the expected error rate (phred-scaled). For example:

    reformat.sh in=subreads.fq out=filtered.fq maq=20


    ...will give you only the reads with an expected error rate of at most 1%.

    Leave a comment:


  • ymc
    started a topic How do I calculate read score?

    How do I calculate read score?

    The SMRT pipeline can use "read score" to filter out reads. "Read Score" seems to be defined as the percentage of bases that is expected to be correct in a read. It is a number between 0 to 1.

    But how do I calculate this metric? Can I do it from the filtered fastq file? Or do I need to read the bax.h5 files?

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

ad_right_rmr

Collapse

News

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by SEQadmin2, 10-28-2026, 09:57 AM
0 responses
22 views
0 reactions
Last Post SEQadmin2  
Started by SEQadmin2, 10-28-2026, 09:51 AM
0 responses
14 views
0 reactions
Last Post SEQadmin2  
Started by SEQadmin2, 10-22-2026, 11:13 AM
0 responses
67 views
0 reactions
Last Post SEQadmin2  
Started by SEQadmin2, 10-22-2026, 10:48 AM
0 responses
47 views
0 reactions
Last Post SEQadmin2  
Working...