Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • IdoBar
    Junior Member
    • Mar 2014
    • 1

    Compare de-novo transcriptome assembly to genome reference guided assembly

    Hi everyone,

    I hope my question is not a total repeat of previous ones, but I did have a read through some previous threads and couldn't find a clear answer.

    I have some RNA-seq data of a non-model species (fish), from a single sample that was sent for ~5GB sequencing and bioinformatics analysis at BGI.
    The data was mapped and assembled to a transcriptome using SOAPdenovo (very limited one, I know because of lack of repetitions and coverage, but it was a preliminary trial to have a basic idea what we're looking at).

    That was roughly a year ago. Currently, a draft genome of a closely related species was published (contigs and scaffolds, not annotated).
    My question is, how can I use this reference genome to improve my transcriptome assembly, or to re-assemble it using that genome as a reference and compare the results to the de-novo assembly I already got.
    I would also like to use the genome as a reference to detect splice junctions and focus on alternative splicing of specific genes.

    I have tried mapping the reads to the published genome reference using STAR, but I'm not sure how to analyse the resulting BAM files and how to use them downstream for assembly or comparison with the de-novo assembly that I got

    Last, I would like to re-annotate the new assembly that I will get, what would be the best tool for it?
    I would prefer to use open source programs, and I have access to a strong linux server. (32 cpu, 1TB ram)

    I am pretty new to NGS bioinformatics, but I'm eager to learn and would appreciate your feedback.

    Thanks, Ido
  • TiborNagy
    Senior Member
    • Mar 2010
    • 329

    #2
    Trinity is an all-in-one tool. It can use reference to make a de-novo transcriptome and it has a module to annotate the results:

    Comment

    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, Yesterday, 11:05 AM
    0 responses
    7 views
    0 reactions
    Last Post SEQadmin2  
    Started by SEQadmin2, 07-02-2026, 11:08 AM
    0 responses
    28 views
    0 reactions
    Last Post SEQadmin2  
    Started by SEQadmin2, 06-30-2026, 05:37 AM
    0 responses
    27 views
    0 reactions
    Last Post SEQadmin2  
    Started by SEQadmin2, 06-26-2026, 11:10 AM
    0 responses
    26 views
    0 reactions
    Last Post SEQadmin2  
    Working...