Go Back   SEQanswers > Applications Forums > RNA Sequencing

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
assembly vs mapping results katiadt RNA Sequencing 0 08-22-2017 03:34 AM
Tophat mapping Results figo1019 Illumina/Solexa 1 01-25-2013 09:54 AM
How two compare two assembly results? (not assembly tools) strob Bioinformatics 4 04-25-2012 06:10 AM
Very Bad Mapping Results with several mapping softwares xquan Bioinformatics 13 05-23-2011 12:31 AM
results of mapping dmborek Illumina/Solexa 0 01-31-2011 10:24 PM

Thread Tools
Old 07-04-2018, 10:08 PM   #1
Junior Member
Location: ho chi minh

Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 1
Default Assembly vs mapping results

Hi guys, I performed RNA-seq analysis of bacterial transcriptome in four different stressed conditions, mapping the reads on its own genome available in NCBI. Then I used FeatureCounts for reads counting and finally I performed differential analysis with NOISeq R package, because of the absence of replicates.
Before that, my tutor submitted the analysis to a famous company requiring a de novo assembly (they used the trinity pipeline for assembly and differential analysis).
I used the same fastq files, and finally I found a larger number of DE genes, but my results are the opposite of company's results. How is it possible? I know that mapping is better than assembly when a reference genome is available and above all I know that the trinity pipeline have some problems for differential analysis, because it uses DESeq or edgeR after quantification by RSEM.
What do you think about?
duonglinhnam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2018, 10:21 PM   #2
Senior Member
Location: East Coast USA

Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,800

This question is difficult to answer without access to data. Why did the company used trinity when you have bacterial genomes and don't expect any splicing. Trinity only assembles transcripts and does not do any diff analysis. Did you not tell the company about the reference genomes available when you asked them to do sequencing?

Were you mapping reads to a very close genome at NCBI? Bacterial genomes can vary a lot even for type strains for what is in your lab and reference at NCBI.
GenoMax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2018, 04:24 AM   #3
Senior Member
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland

Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 356

What do you mean by 'opposite'?
Bukowski is offline   Reply With Quote

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 08:51 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO