SEQanswers

Go Back   SEQanswers > Bioinformatics > Bioinformatics



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ChIP-Seq: ChIP-Array: combinatory analysis of ChIP-seq/chip and microarray gene expre Newsbot! Literature Watch 0 05-19-2011 03:50 AM
ChIP-Seq: ChIP-chip versus ChIP-seq: Lessons for experimental design and data analysi Newsbot! Literature Watch 0 03-02-2011 03:50 AM
BWA, BOWTIE: what parameters for different analysis (ChIP, RNA, miRNA etc) dukevn Bioinformatics 2 08-12-2010 10:57 AM
ChIP-Seq: ChIPpeakAnno: a Bioconductor package to annotate ChIP-seq and ChIP-chip dat Newsbot! Literature Watch 0 05-13-2010 03:00 AM
PubMed: An integrated software system for analyzing ChIP-chip and ChIP-seq data. Newsbot! Literature Watch 0 11-04-2008 06:03 AM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-22-2011, 12:22 PM   #1
analyst
Member
 
Location: US

Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 18
Default bowtie2 parameters for chip-seq

Working with the new bowtie2, anybody here done alignment for chip-seq using it. Please comment of choice of parameters

It is common to choose reads if they match uniquely, for old --best and -m 1 did the trick, not sure about bowtie2, will try -M 1.
analyst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2012, 04:27 AM   #2
harryzs
Member
 
Location: Germany

Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 29
Default

Is there any suggestion about this question?
harryzs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2012, 05:44 AM   #3
harryzs
Member
 
Location: Germany

Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 29
Default

From Bowtie2's Manual

it is said:
=======
Mapping quality: higher = more unique

Accurate mapping qualities are useful for downstream tools like variant callers. For instance, a variant caller might choose to ignore evidence from alignments with mapping quality less than, say, 10. A mapping quality of 10 or less indicates that there is at least a 1 in 10 chance that the read truly originated elsewhere.
=======

Could we chose a threshold for Mapping quality for Chip-seq? For example, all reads with

Mapping quality higher than 30 are considered as uniquely mapping reads ?

tks
harryzs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 10:17 AM   #4
harryzs
Member
 
Location: Germany

Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 29
Default

I think I find the answer from this paper.

The answer is YES.

"...Reads were filtered by removing those with a BWA alignment quality score less than 15..."

Differential oestrogen receptor binding is associated with clinical outcome in breast cancer
Nature, Vol. advance online publication (4 January 2012) doi:10.1038/nature10730


Quote:
Originally Posted by harryzs View Post
From Bowtie2's Manual

it is said:
=======
Mapping quality: higher = more unique

Accurate mapping qualities are useful for downstream tools like variant callers. For instance, a variant caller might choose to ignore evidence from alignments with mapping quality less than, say, 10. A mapping quality of 10 or less indicates that there is at least a 1 in 10 chance that the read truly originated elsewhere.
=======

Could we chose a threshold for Mapping quality for Chip-seq? For example, all reads with

Mapping quality higher than 30 are considered as uniquely mapping reads ?

tks
harryzs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2013, 09:05 AM   #5
crepaldi
Junior Member
 
Location: London, UK

Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5
Default

What does a mapping quality of 0 mean then? That the read may have originated anywhere in the genome?
And if I understand well, reads with low Mapq should be filtered before calling peaks, right?
Luca
crepaldi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2013, 03:24 PM   #6
dpryan
Devon Ryan
 
Location: Freiburg, Germany

Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 3,480
Default

In bowtie2, a MAPQ of 0 means one of the following:
  1. The reported alignment and the next best alignment are both equivalently good, but neither are exact matches (if they're exact matches, the MAPQ is set to 1).
  2. The absolute difference in alignment score between the best and second best alignment is >= 10% (and <30%) of the maximum possible difference in alignment scores and the best alignment's score is itself <67% of the maximum difference in alignment scores.
This is for end-to-end alignments. For local alignments, only #1 will produce this (#2 would produce MAPQs of 9, 12, 14, or 17, depending).

Yes, this is highly confusing and no, it's not documented (unless you consider source code to be documentation).
dpryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2013, 02:08 AM   #7
crepaldi
Junior Member
 
Location: London, UK

Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dpryan View Post
Yes, this is highly confusing


Right, then the reasonable way to proceed is to keep the aligned tags with say MAPQ>10 and call the peaks with them. Does it make sense?
Is it possible that the low-scoring tags are still informative, e.g. on the binding to repetitive sequences?
crepaldi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2013, 02:16 AM   #8
dpryan
Devon Ryan
 
Location: Freiburg, Germany

Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 3,480
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by crepaldi View Post


Right, then the reasonable way to proceed is to keep the aligned tags with say MAPQ>10 and call the peaks with them. Does it make sense?
Is it possible that the low-scoring tags are still informative, e.g. on the binding to repetitive sequences?
That seems like a sensible MAPQ threshold. I agree that the multimappers can still be quite informative. It's likely a good idea to look at them in IGV and bring up a repeatmasker track to see if these might turn out to be interesting or not. The last thing you want to do is throw out multimappers if it turns out that your protein does bind to a repeat region!
dpryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2013, 02:20 AM   #9
harryzs
Member
 
Location: Germany

Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 29
Default

Yes. I agree.
See how people from ENCODE are doing:
samtools view -b -F 1548 -q 30 chipSampleRep1.bam

they(Anshul Kundaje) use -q 30 in their guideline.

https://sites.google.com/site/anshul...e/projects/idr
harryzs is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 04:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO