![]() |
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
samtools vs. bedtools | bair | Bioinformatics | 2 | 02-13-2012 08:57 AM |
How do you calculate the article score? | dan | Wiki Discussion | 1 | 09-18-2011 07:03 AM |
Journalist request: An article on analysis of transcriptome data | jperkel | Bioinformatics | 3 | 06-16-2011 04:29 PM |
Iontorrent article | drio | The Pipeline | 3 | 12-16-2010 10:18 AM |
BEDTools version 2.10.0 | quinlana | Bioinformatics | 0 | 09-21-2010 06:25 PM |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools |
![]() |
#1 |
Senior Member
Location: Charlottesville Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 119
|
![]()
Hi,
A couple of folks had asked about how to cite BEDTools. The manuscript is now available in advanced access. We intended for it to be open access, but this has not yet happened. http://bioinformatics.oxfordjournals...bstract/btq033 Aaron |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Location: Boston Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 693
|
![]()
Congratulations!
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Senior Member
Location: Charlottesville Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 119
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Senior Member
Location: Charlottesville Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 119
|
![]()
Hi all,
I just posted version 2.5.3 of BEDTools which includes the following changes. 1. Fixed careless typo that disallowed "track" and "browser" lines. 2. Substantially increased the speed of pairToBed when comparing paired BAM alignments to BED annotations. The initial implementation left a bit to be desired; in some cases it is now up to 95% faster. 3. Fixed minor bug when reporting overlaps between BEDPE and BED features. 4. Fixed bug when using type "notboth" with BAM files in pairToBed. 5. When comparing BAM files to BED/GFF annotations with intersectBed or pairToBed, the __aligned__ sequence is used, rather than the __original__ sequence. 6. Fixed a bug in bamToBed when reporting edit distance from certain aligners. http://bedtools.googlecode.com Best, Aaron Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Junior Member
Location: Washington DC. (US) Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2
|
![]()
Hi Aaron and everybody,
The documentation of intersectBed nicely explains the use of -s and -f to mind strandedness and fraction overlapped. It is also clear that -v outputs records that do not overlap. Two questions then: 1) When using -v, does intersectBed mind the fraction overlapped? 2) Assuming that 1) is affirmative, is this the correct syntax to catch only the records in A that do not overlap EXACTLY the records in B? intersectBed -abam A.bam -b B.bed -s -f 1 -v > A_notexactly_B.bam Thank you, Ivan Ivan Gregoretti, PhD National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases National Institutes of Health 5 Memorial Dr, Building 5, Room 205. Bethesda, MD 20892. USA. Phone: 1-301-496-1016 Fax: 1-301-496-9878 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Junior Member
Location: Washington DC. (US) Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2
|
![]()
Sorry. I just realized that there is an official email list for BEDTools.
Ivan |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Senior Member
Location: Charlottesville Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 119
|
![]()
Hi Ivan,
These are great questions --- I recognize the documentation could be better in this case. In fact, just yesterday I faced the same question for a similar analysis. In short, the answer to each of your questions is "yes". An example with BED (not BAM), but the behavior is identical for BAM. Code:
$ cat a.bed chr1 10 100 a.small 90 + chr1 10 1000 a.large 900 - Code:
$ cat b.bed chr1 10 100 b.small 90 + chr1 10 1000 b.large 900 + Code:
$ intersectBed -a a.bed -b b.bed -f 1.0 -v (NO OUTPUT) Code:
$ intersectBed -a a.bed -b b.bed -f 1.0 -v -s chr1 10 1000 a.large 900 - I hope this helps you out. Best, Aaron |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
|
|