Go Back   SEQanswers > Bioinformatics > Bioinformatics
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Help installing QUAST(quality assessment tool for genome assemblies) akjones Bioinformatics 3 05-28-2016 04:49 AM
QUAST GFF files for genes pari_89 Bioinformatics 1 07-15-2013 05:28 PM
ArXiv: Optimal Assembly for High Throughput Shotgun Sequencing krobison De novo discovery 0 01-03-2013 08:43 AM
choosing & validating RNA-Seq time course data normalization method(s) anandksrao Bioinformatics 6 10-20-2012 10:50 AM

Thread Tools
Old 09-03-2015, 06:47 PM   #1
Junior Member
Location: Canada

Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 2
Default Choosing Optimal Assembly from Quast Data

Hello Everyone,

I am very new at next generation sequencing and have a question about choosing which assembly is the best to use going forward. My samples are isolates of Helicobacter pylori that I have sent for whole genome sequencing. I have paired end Illumina reads and used Trimmomatic to process them and FastQC to make sure everything appeared acceptable. I then tried deNovo assembly of the forward and reverse paired reads using Velvet, Abyss and SPAdes. I then took the contig files produced from these 3 assembly methods and ran them through Quast to evaluate which assembly worked the best. I have attached links to the alignment produced and the summary file.


Summary File

Abyss and Spades had similar output, with SPAde perhaps being marginally better based on # contigs, largest contig, and N50. Velvet was quite different from Abyss and SPAde and had much fewer misassemblies (6 vs 35 for AByss and 31 for SPAdes). I am not sure what would account for this large difference.

If anyone could point me in the right direction as to which assembly is the best to use and/or how to improve my assemblies I would really appreciate it. Like I said I am super to to NGS and have limited computing skills so this has been a huge learning experience for me (but a fun one!).

Thanks in advance!
Attached Files
File Type: pdf report.pdf (63.7 KB, 6 views)
richelleredekop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2015, 10:23 AM   #2
Brian Bushnell
Super Moderator
Location: Walnut Creek, CA

Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,707

Velvet has a much lower misassembly rate because it is less aggressive and produced a much more fragmented assembly (N50=3862 compared to 141550 for Spades).

I tend to look at the number of predicted long genes (>3000 and >1500bp) as an indicator of assembly quality. Here, Abyss and Spades are similar and Velvet is very much inferior.

It's kind of a toss-up whether Abyss or Spades assembly is better. Spades is more continuous with slightly fewer misassemblies, so I'd probably favor that.
Brian Bushnell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2015, 10:53 AM   #3
Junior Member
Location: Canada

Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 2

Thank you for your reply, I appreciate you taking the time to help me out. I was leaning towards Spades but Velvet being so different was throwing me off. I will go with Spades, which is what my gut was telling me but as I am so new I wanted to make sure I was making the right call. Thank you!
richelleredekop is offline   Reply With Quote

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 01:19 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO