![]() |
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Comparing shotgun metagenomic reads: 454 vs HiSeq | thesoundd | Metagenomics | 7 | 05-16-2015 12:39 PM |
Metagenomic assembly (filter low complexity reads) | rsinha | Bioinformatics | 0 | 10-24-2012 01:24 PM |
Assembly of short reads in Metagenomic studies | chanderbio | Metagenomics | 9 | 09-01-2011 05:09 PM |
PubMed: Orphelia: predicting genes in metagenomic sequencing reads. | Newsbot! | Literature Watch | 0 | 05-12-2009 06:00 AM |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools |
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Location: NYC Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 48
|
![]()
What's considered to be the best tool for this -- removing human sequences from large sets of metagenomic next-gen reads? We tried BMTagger at default values , on a set of ~200 million 100nt Illumina reads, and it left in a lot of reads that hit human seqs with high confidence in subsequent blastn search vs. the NCBI nt database.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Location: NYC Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 48
|
![]()
Yes, it's far from good. But that's how many were left in our metagenomic set after filtering out short reads, duplicate reads, and (via BMTagger) human reads. So we''d like to try a better human read remover, to help insure that the final read set for downstream analysis (e.g. blastn) is all nonhuman. And smaller.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Senior Member
Location: sub-surface moon base Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 372
|
![]() Quote:
p.s. If you have human reads, you probably have other contaminants too, like bacteria from human skin among other stuff. Keep that in mind especially if your contamination rate is high.. Last edited by rhinoceros; 08-29-2013 at 01:51 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Member
Location: NYC Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 48
|
![]()
We don't want to do assembly, because our main goal is to interrogate the diversity of taxa in our samples. We've done quality score filtering, length filtering, adapter trimming, duplicate removal - more vigorous quality trimming may be detrimental to uncovering diversity according to this study
We are studying a surface microbiome that humans interact with, so we don't mind skin bacteria; we want to catalog those, as well as any eukaryotic seqs. We don't even 'mind' the human sequences, it's just that their numbers make the seq files very large, so we want to split them out and treat human/nonhuman sets separately. Last edited by ssully; 08-29-2013 at 02:49 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Senior Member
Location: East Coast USA Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 7,080
|
![]()
Perhaps one of these would be useful:
http://edwards.sdsu.edu/labsite/inde...om-metagenomes http://clovr.org/hmp-dacc/hmp-dacc-c...g-walkthrough/ |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Member
Location: DE Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 65
|
![]()
deconseq?...i haven't used it for anything larger than microbial genomes, but it works fairly well.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
Junior Member
Location: Spain Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1
|
![]() Quote:
Thanks! |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
|
|