SEQanswers

Go Back   SEQanswers > Bioinformatics > Bioinformatics



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
[BWA] Calculate % of reads not aligned to reference qesecir Bioinformatics 18 11-04-2014 02:03 AM
BWA - number of sequences aligned Cbon Bioinformatics 7 05-13-2012 03:45 PM
TopHat/Bowtie - number of reads aligned mgibson Bioinformatics 7 10-22-2011 08:04 PM
Sam flags for bwa-aligned paired end reads with identical + / - strand coordinates spark Bioinformatics 0 03-09-2011 04:00 AM
Determining the number of bases and percent coverage in an aligned sequence kz26 Bioinformatics 0 06-28-2010 08:22 PM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-11-2009, 10:39 AM   #1
totalnew
Member
 
Location: Canada

Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 46
Default the number of aligned reads by maq and bwa

We have applied maq and bwa to align the same production data, and we see an obvious difference on the number of aligned reads between maq and bwa, especially a decrease in the number with longer read length.

This issue is critical, is it a drawback of bwa that aligns much less reads than maq? I am using the default options for bwa running, anyone has experience to increase the aligned reads dramatically by using different bwa options?

I don't know if it is a bottleneck of BWT algorithm even it is much faster than maq. If so, I might have to think again if I am really in favor of bwa. Now bwa is pushed forward, anyone has comments of this issue?

thanks
totalnew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2009, 08:53 AM   #2
joa_ds
Member
 
Location: belgium

Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 52
Default

have you analysed your data further downstream ?

you are better off with 40% mapped sequences and good results than with 60% mapped rubbish.

what is the type of experiment you are doing at the moment? You might consider tweaking the options a bit in function of your experiment. If you are mRNA expression counting, you might allow lower quality reads to be mapped because both the control and sample of interest will have the same amount of 'rubbish match'. When you are SNP hunting you might use more stringent parameters to get rid of false positives etc.

You can always set filters to have almost everything mapped, but I do not think that is the way you want to go?
joa_ds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2009, 11:09 AM   #3
bioinfosm
Senior Member
 
Location: USA

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 482
Default

BWA even allows gaps, so essentially more reads should be mapped than those from gapless MAQ alignment.
__________________
--
bioinfosm
bioinfosm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2009, 11:18 AM   #4
lh3
Senior Member
 
Location: Boston

Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 693
Default

maq is more tolerant with the mismatches toward the 3'-end. Given typical sequencing error rate, the mapping ratio of maq and bwa is quite similar to each other. However, when the sequencing error rate is high, maq maps more reads. At the same time, one may consider to run bwa with "bwa aln -q15" to enable base trimming. This only works when the base quality is not rubbish.
lh3 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 01:20 PM.


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