Go Back   SEQanswers > Bioinformatics > Bioinformatics
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Compare "-GTF" and "-GTF-guide" of cufflink options jiyan Bioinformatics 1 01-23-2014 08:42 AM
"allele balance ratio" and "quality by depth" in VCF files efoss Bioinformatics 2 10-25-2011 11:13 AM
The position file formats ".clocs" and "_pos.txt"? Ist there any difference? elgor Illumina/Solexa 0 06-27-2011 07:55 AM
"Systems biology and administration" & "Genome generation: no engineering allowed" seb567 Bioinformatics 0 05-25-2010 12:19 PM
SEQanswers second "publication": "How to map billions of short reads onto genomes" ECO Literature Watch 0 06-29-2009 11:49 PM

Thread Tools
Old 10-06-2011, 03:04 PM   #1
Junior Member
Location: Berkeley, CA

Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1
Default Relatively large proportion of "LOWDATA", "FAIL" of FPKM_status running cufflink


I am relatively new to analyses of RNA-seq. I am right now analyzing human blood data from 22 biological samples using the tophat and cufflinks pipeline. The cufflinks command I used to analysed the *.bam files (generated from tophat using hg19 reference) is

cufflinks -p 16 -o S01 -G Homo_sapiensPlusChr.GRCh37.63.gtf -b hg19.fa -u -N --compatible-hits-norm ./Sample1_accepted_hits.bam

Both the genes.fpkm_tracking and the isoform.fpkm_tracking resulting output files generated seem to have a relatively large proportion of "LOWDATA" and "FAIL" calls for the FPKM_status attribute.

This proportion of these calls seems similar (~30%) across the multiple samples and also the genes getting these calls seem almost the same again across the multiple samples.

I am not sure if I am doing something wrong - or if this is the expected behavior of the algorithms. I am hoping that I am (or the algorithms) are doing something incorrect.

We have matching microarray data generated from these samples. Some of the highly expressing genes from the microarray data get this "FAIL" status even though the FPKM values seem relatively high.

Any help would be appreciated.

ruben6um is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2011, 10:01 AM   #2
Senior Member
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 279

I've encountered the same issue recently with the newest version. I'm actually testing if it is a package distribution issue right now as old cufflinks version produced values. In my case I came across a dianosis/relapse pair were TP53 went from FPKM 50 to 0 but really identical but for some reason the status is Fail in the relapse sample. In my case this occurred using the pre-compiled linux binary but in the test I did on my laptop with 10 million reads it worked on my Mac laptop with a version compiled from source. So now testing the entire set of reads on our Mac workstation to compare the output from our linux HPC resource
Jon_Keats is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2011, 12:19 PM   #3
Senior Member
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 279

In my hands the "FAIL" result is completely inconsistent. For TP53, with the full dataset (37.34 million read pairs) you get a "FAIL" but with the first 10 million pairs FPKM of 42 with an "OK". The odd thing is there is a clear correlation with the number of reads as there were 5546 genes listed as "FAIL" using 10 million reads and 8059 with the full dataset.... To make matters worse the number of "FAIL" genes moves around as you change the normalization parameters. Right now I'm not too impressed and I think I'll go back to calculating FPKM by hand and using other packages. I can understand there being computation issues with fragment handling but at the gene level it seems pretty straight forward.
Jon_Keats is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2011, 12:39 AM   #4
Location: germany

Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 31

Dear Jon,
Which package would you suggest as an alternative? I am not convince I can use DESeq or EdgeR with paired end data. What do you think?

oliviera 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 06:02 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO