Seqanswers Leaderboard Ad

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • HTSeq-count large proportion of mapped reads with no_feature

    Hi,
    I am fairly new to RNA-Seq analysis and hoped someone could help me diagnose the reason why I have such a low proportion of reads mapped to features with my current method.

    The experiment:
    Code:
    - Were looking at the retina in developing mice
    - I have two conditions (wild-type vs mutant), each with 4 biological replicates (8 in total).
    - RNA prepared using Illumina TruSeq stranded kit. Ribo-Zero Deplete techneque.
    - Using a pair-end 2 x 100bp HiSeq reads. Approximately 40 million pairs per replicate.
    The methods:
    Code:
    - Trimmed low quality regions/reads using Trimmomatic.
    - Using TopHat2 to map reads to UCSC mm10 reference genome available on the tophat website.
      - --no-novel-juncs and larger --mate-inner-dist arguments
      - Example numbers from one replicate:
        - 92.8% overall mapping rate
        - 30,244,035 aligned pairs; of these:
          - 9.4% have multiple alignments
          - 1.9% are discordant alignments
        - 87.6% concordant pair alignment rate
        - These numbers seem pretty good to me.
    - Sorted the acccepted_hits.bam file by read name using 'samtools sort -n'
    - Converted bam to sam using 'samtools view'
    - Extracting feature read counts using HTSeq-count and the gtf annotation file also from UCSC mm10.
      - Using default arguments (method=union and stranded=yes)
      - Example numbers:
        - successfull feature = 505,622
        - no feature = 29,039,281
        - ambiguous feature = 2525
        - non unique feature = 10,519,556
        - Success rate = 1.26%
    As you can see I have only a very small proportion of reads mapped to a feature. I don't really know what is normal but this seems very small. I am certain that it is the correct genes.gtf annotation file as it was provided gzipped with the genome itself. What kind of % of reads mapped on features should I be expecting? What can I do to diagnose this problem? Can anyone spot anything wrong that I am doing? Thanks.

    I also have a second question, I am able to do limited down-stream analysis using DESeq using the currently read counts. I get very few (only two) genes with differential expression. These two genes are directly adjacent to each other on the genome but not overlapping, these are Uckl1 and Znf512b (http://genome-euro.ucsc.edu/cgi-bin/...gsid=194787325). There are 130 bp between them including the UTRs. I can't imagine how this may be happening if I am using the --union option in HTSeq-count as any reads that overlap both should be labeled as ambiguous features.

    Thanks for any help.

  • #2
    Here's your problem.
    (method=union and stranded=yes)
    For libraries prepared using TruSeq Stranded RNA Kits (dUTP second strand marking) you should set htseq-count -stranded=reverse

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks. That has greatly improved the feature counts:

      successfull feature = 15,000,966 (45.3%)
      no_feature = 8,715,612 (26.33%)
      ambiguous = 172,178 (0.52%)
      alignment_not_unique = 9,215,369 (27.8%)

      Does 45.3% success rate seem close to what I should be expecting in mice? I have nothing to compare it to.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by edm1 View Post
        Does 45.3% success rate seem close to what I should be expecting in mice? I have nothing to compare it to.
        Hey edm1,

        I'm not sure if you were ever able to get advice on whether 45.3% is close to what you should expect, but here are my two cents:
        1) The "alignment_not_unique" feature is for reads with low alignment quality, which usually means reads that had multiple mappings. Count-based methods of differential expression (e.g. DESeq) usually ignore these, i.e. they focus on "unique matches", so you shouldn't include them in your final percentage tally. Excluding them gives you a success rate of 62.8%.
        2) I'm not very familiar with the literature on what an expected success rate would be, but one example I am aware of (and was posted in another forum) is this nature paper (link: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...ture08872.html), reporting in their supplementary information that they mapped an average of 86% (range of 64-91%) uniquely matching reads to exons. All of their numbers are reported in the first supplementary table. Thus, your success rate of 62.8% is close to the bottom of their range. There might still be some areas of improvement for you, but you're pretty darn close.

        Hope that helps!

        Comment


        • #5
          Keep also in mind...this was Ribo Zero...All sorts of RNAs are in there...
          I would expect PolyA selection to be higher (mapping to exons)...but that's just me thinking...

          Remi

          Comment

          Latest Articles

          Collapse

          • seqadmin
            Strategies for Sequencing Challenging Samples
            by seqadmin


            Despite advancements in sequencing platforms and related sample preparation technologies, certain sample types continue to present significant challenges that can compromise sequencing results. Pedro Echave, Senior Manager of the Global Business Segment at Revvity, explained that the success of a sequencing experiment ultimately depends on the amount and integrity of the nucleic acid template (RNA or DNA) obtained from a sample. “The better the quality of the nucleic acid isolated...
            03-22-2024, 06:39 AM
          • seqadmin
            Techniques and Challenges in Conservation Genomics
            by seqadmin



            The field of conservation genomics centers on applying genomics technologies in support of conservation efforts and the preservation of biodiversity. This article features interviews with two researchers who showcase their innovative work and highlight the current state and future of conservation genomics.

            Avian Conservation
            Matthew DeSaix, a recent doctoral graduate from Kristen Ruegg’s lab at The University of Colorado, shared that most of his research...
            03-08-2024, 10:41 AM

          ad_right_rmr

          Collapse

          News

          Collapse

          Topics Statistics Last Post
          Started by seqadmin, Yesterday, 06:37 PM
          0 responses
          11 views
          0 likes
          Last Post seqadmin  
          Started by seqadmin, Yesterday, 06:07 PM
          0 responses
          10 views
          0 likes
          Last Post seqadmin  
          Started by seqadmin, 03-22-2024, 10:03 AM
          0 responses
          51 views
          0 likes
          Last Post seqadmin  
          Started by seqadmin, 03-21-2024, 07:32 AM
          0 responses
          67 views
          0 likes
          Last Post seqadmin  
          Working...
          X