Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Hedi86
    Member
    • Oct 2017
    • 24

    depth of coverage and read depth using Bismark

    hello everyone

    is it possible to calculate depth of coverage and read depth using Bismark ? if yes how and if No what is the best way to calculate depth of coverage and read of depth from RRBS reads taking from illumina sequencing ?

    Best
  • fkrueger
    Senior Member
    • Sep 2009
    • 627

    #2
    Bismark itself is merely the alignment tool, and as such does not do any further analysis. I am sure there are several different options to choose from to assess sequence coverage, I can only recommend SeqMonk which offers visualisation and calculations in one package.

    Comment

    • Hedi86
      Member
      • Oct 2017
      • 24

      #3
      thank you for your help.

      i tried to use seqmonk, but i wasnt sure which file should i import (.fq file after trimming or COV file from bismark) ? in addition what is the correct pipeline in seqmonk, is it ok to import>define probes>running window generator>quantitation>% coverage quantitation OR Coverage depth quantitation ? Seqmonk then report a summary but in summary report noting showing the coverage or Coverage depth.

      thanks again

      Comment

      • fkrueger
        Senior Member
        • Sep 2009
        • 627

        #4
        It depends a little on which kind of statistics you are interested in. If you really just want to get a value for a fold-coverage of your experiment you should probably import the (deduplicated) Bismark BAM files into SeqMonk because this statistic is a function of the total read length of all reads in your experiment and the size of the genome.

        If you import those BAM files you can do e.g. a running Window probe generation followed by a read count quantitation. If you then Click on "DataStore Summary Report" you will see a report that has - among many fields - a Fold Coverage column: this is the value you are looking for. You can also get a mean/median quantification for your probe of interest.

        If you wanted to get similar statistic for single-base resolution cytosines you could import the coverage files, design probes over the Read Positions and count their abundance. But yea, it depends on what you really want to get out in the end.

        Comment

        • Hedi86
          Member
          • Oct 2017
          • 24

          #5
          really appreciate your comment

          so could we say that 0.04 as fold coverage is equal to 4X depth coverage, and could we say that read coverage is equal to mapping efficiency?

          thanks again

          Comment

          • fkrueger
            Senior Member
            • Sep 2009
            • 627

            #6
            Not quite. A 0.04 fold-coverage means that - on average - each position in the genome was covered 0.04 times. A 4-fold would be, well, 4.

            This value is obviously not so meaningful if you used only methylation calls to calculate the value, since they are only 1bp long ( (total number of reads * read length) / length of genome = fold-coverage).

            The mapping efficiency is a mapping specific parameter that has to do with which fraction of a sequencing file comes from mappable parts of the genome, and as such has nothing to do with fold-coverage. If you take a library with a 70% mapping efficiency and sequence four times as much, the fold coverage will be 4-times higher but the mapping efficiency is unchanged...

            Comment

            • Hedi86
              Member
              • Oct 2017
              • 24

              #7
              thanks alot for your explanation, now became more clear

              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, 07-02-2026, 11:08 AM
              0 responses
              22 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
              22 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...