Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • AEB
    Junior Member
    • Aug 2011
    • 1

    Bowtie. Different outputs from equivalent(?) inputs.

    Hello all

    I'm currently trying to align & annotate lots of short sequences to the human genome (from Ensembl) using Bowtie (and R).

    When the query sequences are given on the command line (with -c) as a comma-separated list I cannot make get Bowtie to yield the same result when using a self-created FASTQ-file. The suspected error is what I choose as default (Phred) read qualities in the FASTQ-file. It is clear that if Bowtie is given sequences on the command line it must assume some default read qualities, but what is the default value? I cannot find the answer in the Bowtie manual but I suspect, that the answer is Phred quality 40 (corresponding to ASCII character "h"(?)) since this quality is used with other commands.

    Using "h" as default read-quality, however, does not give exactly the same results? Where am I taking the wrong turn?

    Minimal example: Running

    bowtie -a --fullref Homo_sapiens.GRCh37.63.cdna.all TestFASTQ.fq test1.txt
    bowtie -c -a --fullref Homo_sapiens.GRCh37.63.cdna.all AAATTGCTCTTAGCATA test2.txt

    where the TestFASTQ.fq is simply

    @Seq1
    AAATTGCTCTTAGCATA
    +
    hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

    does not give the the same results.

    The output from my R-script is (which filters and formats the bowtie output)

    > genes1
    [1] "ENSG00000135829" "ENSG00000135829" "ENSG00000135829" "ENSG00000151789"
    [5] "ENSG00000127081" "ENSG00000122042" "ENSG00000162894" "ENSG00000187699"
    [9] "ENSG00000187699" "ENSG00000231890" "ENSG00000182749" "ENSG00000233124"
    [13] "ENSG00000228002" "ENSG00000101040" "ENSG00000101040" "ENSG00000112773"
    [17] "ENSG00000112773" "ENSG00000112773"
    > genes2
    [1] "ENSG00000135829" "ENSG00000135829" "ENSG00000135829" "ENSG00000151789"
    [5] "ENSG00000127081" "ENSG00000122042" "ENSG00000162894" "ENSG00000231890"
    [9] "ENSG00000187699" "ENSG00000187699" "ENSG00000182749" "ENSG00000233124"
    [13] "ENSG00000228002" "ENSG00000101040" "ENSG00000101040" "ENSG00000112773"
    [17] "ENSG00000112773" "ENSG00000112773"

    (EDIT: The two vectors above differs at positions 8 and 10)

    Can anyone help me?

    Thanks!
    AEB

    ps. does anyone know, how to make Bowtie return Gene Symbols. I.e. get DHX9 for ENSG00000135829 and so on.
    Last edited by AEB; 08-18-2011, 01:41 AM.
  • zee
    NGS specialist
    • Apr 2008
    • 249

    #2
    You should use the org.Hs.eg.db bioconductor package to convert between human gene symbol and Ensembl IDs

    Comment

    Latest Articles

    Collapse

    • SEQadmin2
      Advanced Sequencing Platforms Tackle Neuroscience’s Toughest Genomics Problems
      by SEQadmin2



      Genomics studies in neuroscience face a special challenge due to the brain’s complexity and scarcity of samples. Mapping changes in cell type and state using conventional next-generation sequencing methods remains challenging. Advances in technologies like single-cell sequencing, spatial transcriptomics, and long-read sequencing have opened the door to deeper studies of the brain and diseases like Alzheimer’s, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), and schizophrenia.
      ...
      07-09-2026, 11:10 AM
    • SEQadmin2
      Cancer Drug Resistance: The Lingering Barrier to Rising Survival
      by SEQadmin2



      Cancer survival rates have significantly increased in the last few decades in the United States, reaching a combined 70% 5-year survival rate by 2021. Behind this number, there are years of research to find new therapies, drug targets, and early detection methods. But there is one core challenge that keeps slowing down these advances, and it’s about drug resistance.

      There is no single reason why many patients don’t respond to treatment as expected. Cancer is...
      07-08-2026, 05:17 AM
    • 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

    ad_right_rmr

    Collapse

    News

    Collapse

    Topics Statistics Last Post
    Started by SEQadmin2, Yesterday, 10:26 AM
    0 responses
    13 views
    0 reactions
    Last Post SEQadmin2  
    Started by SEQadmin2, 07-09-2026, 10:04 AM
    0 responses
    25 views
    0 reactions
    Last Post SEQadmin2  
    Started by SEQadmin2, 07-08-2026, 10:08 AM
    0 responses
    16 views
    0 reactions
    Last Post SEQadmin2  
    Started by SEQadmin2, 07-07-2026, 11:05 AM
    0 responses
    33 views
    0 reactions
    Last Post SEQadmin2  
    Working...