Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • morning latte
    Member
    • Jun 2013
    • 91

    Length of genome covered by reads by mapping

    Hello,

    I have generated SAM and BAM files after mapping my Illumina reads to a reference genome. Now I want to know how much of the reference genome is covered (aligned/mapped) by reads (e.g. 50% of the reference genome is covered by reads). I have seen many ways to get the depth of reads but haven't found a way to get the coverage of genome length (breadth or width). Could anyone suggest an advice on this? Thanks.
    Last edited by morning latte; 01-29-2015, 05:46 PM.
  • Sergioo
    Member
    • Oct 2013
    • 29

    #2
    Originally posted by morning latte View Post
    Hello,

    I have seen many ways to get the depth of reads but haven't found a way to get the coverage of genome length (breadth or width). Could anyone suggest an advice on this? Thanks.
    Hi,
    If you have a CLC Genomics Workbench around, you can generate what they call a "detailed mapping report" of your reads-Reference genome. It will show the fraction of genome covered by your reads.
    Hope it helps
    Cheers

    Comment

    • morning latte
      Member
      • Jun 2013
      • 91

      #3
      Thanks Sergioo. Unfortunately, I don't have a CLC Genomics Workbench around me. Could you direct me an alternative way if you have any idea? Thanks!

      Comment

      • GenoMax
        Senior Member
        • Feb 2008
        • 7142

        #4
        Qualimap generates detailed stats for BAM files.

        Comment

        • Brian Bushnell
          Super Moderator
          • Jan 2014
          • 2709

          #5
          And there's also...

          The BBMap suite's pileup program! It takes sam or bam, sorted or unsorted.

          pileup.sh in=mapped.sam out=stats.txt hist=histogram.txt

          stats.txt will contain the average depth and percent covered of each reference sequence; the histogram will contain the exact number of bases with a each coverage level. You can also get per-base coverage or binned coverage if you want to plot the coverage. It also generates median and standard deviation, and so forth.

          It's also possible to generate coverage directly from BBMap, without an intermediate sam file, like this:

          bbmap.sh in=reads.fq ref=reference.fasta nodisk covstats=stats.txt covhist=histogram.txt

          We use this a lot in situations where all you care about is coverage distributions, which is somewhat common in metagenome assemblies. It also supports most of the flags that pileup.sh supports, though the syntax is slightly different to prevent collisions. In each case you can see all the possible flags by running the shellscript with no arguments.

          P.S. I put some work into it last week and it is now over 3x as fast as it used to be, and it used to be pretty fast!
          Last edited by Brian Bushnell; 01-29-2015, 06:52 PM.

          Comment

          • morning latte
            Member
            • Jun 2013
            • 91

            #6
            Dear Brian Bushnell,

            Thanks a lot for the suggestion. I just ran BBMap on one of my sam files and the summary output looks like below.

            Average coverage: 9.75
            Percent scaffolds with any coverage: 100.00
            Percent of reference bases covered: 0.32

            I guess only 0.32 proportion of the reference genome was covered by reads at any coverage. Then what does " Percent scaffolds with any coverage" mean? Thanks for your help in advance.

            Comment

            • Brian Bushnell
              Super Moderator
              • Jan 2014
              • 2709

              #7
              Wow - you had very uneven coverage.

              "Percent of scaffolds with any coverage" means that - well... let's assume you had a human reference genome, which has 25 chromosomes: 1-22, X, Y and M.

              In that case, if each of those 25 sequences had at least one read hit, then the percentage of scaffolds with coverage would be 100%. You can get more details in the per-scaffold coverage file to see what percent of each scaffold was covered... in general, for a complete genome, "scaffold" means "chromosome".

              0.32% refers to the percent of bases across the entire genome that had any coverage, and you can consult the histogram for more details. But essentially, (100% - 0.32%) of the genome had zero coverage. I assume this was a ChipSeq experiment or similar where the assumption is that 99.9% of the coverage falls upon 0.1% of the genome.

              Comment

              • morning latte
                Member
                • Jun 2013
                • 91

                #8
                Dear Brian Bushnell,

                Thanks a lot for the detailed explanation on this. Everything is now very clear.

                Comment

                Latest Articles

                Collapse

                • SEQadmin2
                  Advanced Sequencing Platforms Tackle Neuroscience’s Toughest Genomics Problems
                  by SEQadmin2



                  Genomics studies in neuroscience face a special challenge due to the brain’s complexity and scarcity of samples. Mapping changes in cell type and state using conventional next-generation sequencing methods remains challenging. Advances in technologies like single-cell sequencing, spatial transcriptomics, and long-read sequencing have opened the door to deeper studies of the brain and diseases like Alzheimer’s, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), and schizophrenia.
                  ...
                  07-09-2026, 11:10 AM
                • SEQadmin2
                  Cancer Drug Resistance: The Lingering Barrier to Rising Survival
                  by SEQadmin2



                  Cancer survival rates have significantly increased in the last few decades in the United States, reaching a combined 70% 5-year survival rate by 2021. Behind this number, there are years of research to find new therapies, drug targets, and early detection methods. But there is one core challenge that keeps slowing down these advances, and it’s about drug resistance.

                  There is no single reason why many patients don’t respond to treatment as expected. Cancer is...
                  07-08-2026, 05:17 AM
                • GATTACAT
                  Reply to Nine Things a Sample Prep Scientist Thinks About Before Sequencing
                  by GATTACAT
                  Love this - good data definitely starts from good input, and poor input can only give relatively poor data. I particularly like the mention of Nanodrop/absorbance based methods for quantification. It's such a toss up if you'll get an accurate reading or what amounts to a randomly generated number, and a lot of library/sequencing related issues can be traced back to poor quant.
                  07-01-2026, 11:43 AM

                ad_right_rmr

                Collapse

                News

                Collapse

                Topics Statistics Last Post
                Started by SEQadmin2, 07-13-2026, 10:26 AM
                0 responses
                27 views
                0 reactions
                Last Post SEQadmin2  
                Started by SEQadmin2, 07-09-2026, 10:04 AM
                0 responses
                37 views
                0 reactions
                Last Post SEQadmin2  
                Started by SEQadmin2, 07-08-2026, 10:08 AM
                0 responses
                24 views
                0 reactions
                Last Post SEQadmin2  
                Started by SEQadmin2, 07-07-2026, 11:05 AM
                0 responses
                34 views
                0 reactions
                Last Post SEQadmin2  
                Working...