Go Back   SEQanswers > Bioinformatics > Bioinformatics

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Bowtie call to get unique, multi-hits and nonmatching reads PFS Bioinformatics 3 07-07-2019 08:18 AM
AB SOLiD Bioscope rdeborja Bioinformatics 35 09-27-2011 06:41 PM
Filtering multi hits from sam file David Lyon Bioinformatics 1 05-27-2010 12:18 PM
Cuffdiff multi-protein vs multi-promoter RockChalkJayhawk Bioinformatics 2 03-26-2010 11:26 AM
Bioscope sam output damiankao Bioinformatics 4 03-23-2010 07:36 PM

Thread Tools
Old 08-13-2011, 03:31 AM   #1
Location: seoul Korea

Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 19
Unhappy Bioscope multi-hits

I found a strange mapping result by Bioscope.
I analyzed the paried end reads from a whole transcriptome, and checked the mapping results.
Threre were a number of reads which were both properly mapped and unmapped at the same time.
For instance, a pair of reads (F3 & F5) '504_910_1119' were mapped poperly, however, there were extra alignments that the F3 was unmapped. I set the 'Alignment filter modes' as 'Primary', so the one best alignment was supposed to be selected among multi-hits. Is it a bug of Bioscope? Any one has observed this kind of results?

504_910_1119 83 chr21 32600530 0 4H46M = 32600531 50 TTTTTTTAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA @IIIIB1=IIEIIIIHIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII%%IIII; RG:Z:20110812083702784 NH:i:4 CM:i:3 SM:i:4 CQ:Z:;?;:?7%=;?;9:=929?5:<8==955=<790==:15===12==>3.;=< CS:Z:T3000030000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

504_910_1119 163 chr21 32600531 0 25M10H = 32600530 -50 TTTTTTAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA IED86:IE//%%5,,%&-+*/=:/0 RG:Z:20110812083702784 NH:i:4 CM:i:2 SM:i:1 CQ:Z:B)=(1&5=)')%1%(%&''%&*4')(%7%%%%5(. CS:Z:G10000030000200003000000003303000020

504_910_1119 69 * 0 0 * chr21 18218140 0 NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN * RG:Z:20110812083702784 NH:i:4 CQ:Z:;?;:?7%=;?;9:=929?5:<8==955=<790==:15===12==>3.;=< CS:Z:T30000030000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

504_910_1119 101 * 0 0 * chr21 34903877 0 NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN * RG:Z:20110812083702784 NH:i:4 CQ:Z:;?;:?7%=;?;9:=929?5:<8==955=<790==:15===12==>3.;=<
eoh001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2011, 08:13 AM   #2
Senior Member
Location: Research Triangle Park, NC

Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 245

The "Alignment filter modes", if I'm remembering correctly (I don't have my BioScope manual at hand) refers to what gets taken from the .bam file into the wig file.

To see what is in your .bam file, just look in your alignmentReport.txt file, the line right under the "-----" (should read "Reads mapped, not filtered") is what is actually in your .bam file.

To get just the "unique" or primary reads, you can use the matobam tool and it has a parameter to pull out only the primary (called "unique") reads into a new .bam file for you.

In a pipeline run, you can filter what goes into the merge .bam file using a mapping qv filter cutoff.

I was told that LifeScope has settings to choose what gets dumped into the mapping .bam file, but so far, I can only see settings to alter what gets used from the .bam file for the .wig files and the coverage reports. As far as I can find thus far, LifeScope is the same as BioScope in this regard - the only way to filter what the pipeline puts into the merge .bam file is via a mapping qv cutoff. Otherwise, all non-filtered, mapped reads end up in the .bam file and you then have to pull out those you want to use in your next steps. I may well have missed or not found something in LifeScope yet though.
mbblack is offline   Reply With Quote

bioscope, transcriptome

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 09:58 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO