SEQanswers

Go Back   SEQanswers > Applications Forums > Genomic Resequencing

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
bowtie2 vs. TopHat amitm Bioinformatics 9 12-14-2012 11:53 AM
Bowtie2 / Bowtie 2 gapped alignment hanshart Bioinformatics 0 03-15-2012 07:52 AM
Is bowtie2 really this unstable? kgulukota Bioinformatics 5 02-22-2012 08:27 AM
Bowtie2 --al and --un: no output arnav Bioinformatics 3 02-14-2012 01:08 PM
Bowtie2 and 2 GB limit mscholz Bioinformatics 1 01-03-2012 01:08 PM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-26-2012, 11:16 PM   #1
beajorrin
Junior Member
 
Location: Madrid

Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 6
Default Bowtie vs Bowtie2

I'm doing my PhD in Genomics of the interaction rhizobium-legume.
I've sequenced 100 bacteria pooled with Illumina Hiseq 2000, 500 bp PE library, 100 bp reads, and I obtained 12 millions of reads. I've trimmed the reads in the 3' end with Trimmomatic. Then I've analysed my data with Bowtie and Bowtie2, but I've got different results between them, but not those that appear in the article Langmead & Salzberg, 2012, Fast Gapped-read alignment with Bowtie2. Nature Methods 9(4):357-359.
( http://www.nature.com/nmeth/journal/...meth.1923.html )

The options that I've used are:

Bowtie 2: --phred64 --very-sensitive --end-to-end -M2 -I0 -X1000 --fr --no-discordant --no-contain --no-overlap -p4 --no-mixed -t -x
Bowtie: --phred64 --fr -n0 --best -q -M2 -X1000 -I0 -p2 -t

Bowtie recruits more reads than Bowtie2 in this conditions, but Bowtie2 allows more SNPs (differences from reference genome) than Bowtie. I've represented my data in a graphic. I've selected one region of the genome and I've analysed the coverage and the SNPs (representing it as % of differences from reference sequence). As I have 100 bacteria DNA, I need to see the diversity, and the only way is with the SNPs. I include some of this results.

I don't know by what is happennig...

Thanks for all
Attached Files
File Type: pdf Graphics.pdf (92.7 KB, 176 views)
beajorrin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2013, 06:14 PM   #2
jp.
Senior Member
 
Location: NikoNarita.jp

Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 137
Question

did you get any answer?
Can you please share your idea ?
I got this one from bowtie website which says: http://bowtie-bio.sourceforge.net/index.shtml
Differences between Bowtie 2 and Bowtie 1 include:
For reads longer than about 50 bp Bowtie 2 is generally faster, more sensitive, and uses less memory than Bowtie 1. For relatively short reads (e.g. less than 50 bp) Bowtie 1 is sometimes faster and/or more sensitive.
Bowtie 2 supports gapped alignment with affine gap penalties. Number of gaps and gap lengths are not restricted, except by way of the configurable scoring scheme. Bowtie 1 finds just ungapped alignments.
Bowtie 2 supports local alignment, which doesn't require reads to align end-to-end. Local alignments might be "trimmed" ("soft clipped") at one or both extremes in a way that optimizes alignment score. Bowtie 2 also supports end-to-end alignment which, like Bowtie 1, requires that the read align entirely.
There is no upper limit on read length in Bowtie 2. Bowtie 1 has an upper limit of around 1000 bp.
Bowtie 2 allows alignments to overlap ambiguous characters (e.g. Ns) in the reference. Bowtie 1 does not.
Bowtie 2 does away with Bowtie 1's notion of alignment "stratum", and its distinction between "Maq-like" and "end-to-end" modes. In Bowtie 2 all alignments lie along a continuous spectrum of alignment scores where the scoring scheme, similar to Needleman-Wunsch and Smith-Waterman.
Bowtie 2's paired-end alignment is more flexible. E.g. for pairs that do not align in a paired fashion, Bowtie 2 attempts to find unpaired alignments for each mate.
Bowtie 2 does not align colorspace reads.

expecting your view
Thank you
jp.


Quote:
Originally Posted by beajorrin View Post
I'm doing my PhD in Genomics of the interaction rhizobium-legume.
I've sequenced 100 bacteria pooled with Illumina Hiseq 2000, 500 bp PE library, 100 bp reads, and I obtained 12 millions of reads. I've trimmed the reads in the 3' end with Trimmomatic. Then I've analysed my data with Bowtie and Bowtie2, but I've got different results between them, but not those that appear in the article Langmead & Salzberg, 2012, Fast Gapped-read alignment with Bowtie2. Nature Methods 9(4):357-359.
( http://www.nature.com/nmeth/journal/...meth.1923.html )

The options that I've used are:

Bowtie 2: --phred64 --very-sensitive --end-to-end -M2 -I0 -X1000 --fr --no-discordant --no-contain --no-overlap -p4 --no-mixed -t -x
Bowtie: --phred64 --fr -n0 --best -q -M2 -X1000 -I0 -p2 -t

Bowtie recruits more reads than Bowtie2 in this conditions, but Bowtie2 allows more SNPs (differences from reference genome) than Bowtie. I've represented my data in a graphic. I've selected one region of the genome and I've analysed the coverage and the SNPs (representing it as % of differences from reference sequence). As I have 100 bacteria DNA, I need to see the diversity, and the only way is with the SNPs. I include some of this results.

I don't know by what is happennig...

Thanks for all

Last edited by jp.; 12-09-2013 at 07:02 PM. Reason: correcting info
jp. is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off




All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.