SEQanswers

Go Back   SEQanswers > Bioinformatics > Bioinformatics



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Remove identical mapping reads between two indexed samples felvis56 Bioinformatics 17 11-16-2015 12:01 PM
Co-assembly of metatranscriptome samples mkroeger Bioinformatics 0 07-24-2015 12:07 PM
RNA-Seq:Different mapping rates between samples stemshell Bioinformatics 1 06-02-2014 12:30 AM
Mapping statistics from fragmented FFPE samples using Ribo-Zero iris_aurelia RNA Sequencing 0 03-29-2013 03:51 AM
de novo assembly of micrbiome samples dattam RNA Sequencing 0 08-27-2010 08:26 AM

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-03-2015, 02:53 PM   #1
dawn1313
Member
 
Location: Tucson

Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 21
Default Is it necessary to do the same mapping/assembly for different samples?

Hi,

I am using tophat for the alignment of raw reads to a reference. I have total six samples, and half got around 70% concordant pair alignment rate whereas other half below 40% in the files of align_summary.txt.

I wonder if I need to adjust either the tophat parameters or additional QC processes to try to increase those low alignment rate samples. Because I think all the processes (including mapping and assembly) for each sample should be SAME and thus no bias for the final differential expression. Is it correct?

Thanks!!
Dawn
dawn1313 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2015, 04:10 PM   #2
bioBob
Member
 
Location: Virginia

Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 72
Default

What is the opposite of TMI?

Lots of things can lead to issues in mapping. Sample degradation, sample contamination, etc. Seems to me that one of the things I would do is to get the reads that are not aligning and check a bunch of them out, are they short, blast to something, all A or T or etc.

You mentioned assembly, is the reference a denovo transcriptome assembly? Did you use all the samples? Truly denovo or reference guided? What QC steps do you do?
bioBob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2015, 07:38 AM   #3
westerman
Rick Westerman
 
Location: Purdue University, Indiana, USA

Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,104
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dawn1313 View Post
Because I think all the processes (including mapping and assembly) for each sample should be SAME and thus no bias for the final differential expression. Is it correct?
To answer your direct question: yes, using the same processes for each sample should not cause a bias.

However going along what bioBob wrote, you have something amiss. The suggestion of taking a handful of non-mapping reads from both the 70% mapping and 40% mapping samples and see what they blast-match to should be informative. Looking harder at your QC stats would be useful.
westerman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2015, 09:45 AM   #4
dawn1313
Member
 
Location: Tucson

Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 21
Default

Thanks for your reply. I didn't do QC filtering and I started with Tophat because it seems quite good and similar qualities measured by FastQc for all six samples.

I wonder if the low mapping could result from the biological cause (one gene knocked down vs wild type) and in this case I just go ahead to do assembly.

Thanks!
Dawn
dawn1313 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2015, 10:47 AM   #5
Brian Bushnell
Super Moderator
 
Location: Walnut Creek, CA

Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,707
Default

If you are experience such extremely low alignment and pairing rates with TopHat, I suggest you try BBMap, which is much more sensitive. Low alignment rates caused by errors and differences between the reference and the subject will incur bias even if your process is the same, because alignment sensitivity is not continuous, but stepwise.
Brian Bushnell 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 05:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO