Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • linudz
    Junior Member
    • Feb 2017
    • 3

    A question on Illumina paired-end reads alignment. Merging from different samples

    Hi folks, I have a question on how to better merge paired-end reads coming from different samples. Basically, we do align genome resequencing fastq with bwa mem, and compress the resulting .sam file into a .bam.

    If we have to merge two different samples, there are basically two ways. The first is to merge the fastqs and align the resulting file, the second is to make use of samtools merge to merge the .bam files.

    My concern is whether the two procedures are equally valid, or there is some relevant difference in the outcome.

    I think that everything revolves around the functioning of the Burrows Wheeler Transform Alignment. I have broadly understood the application of the BWT and of the indexing, but I still wonder if the number of reads affects the results of the alignment, or each read is aligned independently.

    Can anyone give me more insights on this?
  • GenoMax
    Senior Member
    • Feb 2008
    • 7142

    #2
    Originally posted by linudz View Post
    Hi folks, I have a question on how to better merge paired-end reads coming from different samples. Basically, we do align genome resequencing fastq with bwa mem, and compress the resulting .sam file into a .bam.

    If we have to merge two different samples, there are basically two ways. The first is to merge the fastqs and align the resulting file, the second is to make use of samtools merge to merge the .bam files.

    My concern is whether the two procedures are equally valid, or there is some relevant difference in the outcome.
    Either way should be fine after you take the "note" below into account.

    Note: When you are referencing "merging samples" are you referring to technical replicates of the same sample? Merging would be appropriate only in that case. If "samples" are true biological replicates then you would want to keep them separate for downstream analysis.

    but I still wonder if the number of reads affects the results of the alignment, or each read is aligned independently.

    Can anyone give me more insights on this?
    Each read pair is independently aligned to the reference so there is no effect of the amount of data on actual alignments.

    Comment

    • linudz
      Junior Member
      • Feb 2017
      • 3

      #3
      Thank you very much for your answer. This is going to be done on replicates of the same sample, so it should apply. Thanks again

      Comment

      • GenoMax
        Senior Member
        • Feb 2008
        • 7142

        #4
        Originally posted by linudz View Post
        Thank you very much for your answer. This is going to be done on replicates of the same sample, so it should apply. Thanks again
        Just want to re-emphasize. Are these technical replicates or biological? Merging data is only appropriate for technical replicates.

        Comment

        • Brian Bushnell
          Super Moderator
          • Jan 2014
          • 2709

          #5
          Because technical replicates could have different insert sizes, and the average (or estimated) insert size can have an effect on alignment, you may get different results even for technical replicates between merging prior to mapping versus merging after mapping. In many cases this difference is trivial and in general mapping the reads independently is not guaranteed to give you an optimal answer with respect to insert size anyway, since there is an order dependency, but it's something to be aware of.

          Comment

          Latest Articles

          Collapse

          • SEQadmin2
            Nine Things a Sample Prep Scientist Thinks About Before Sequencing
            by SEQadmin2


            I’m not a sequencing expert. I’m a purification scientist who uses NGS to evaluate workflows my group develops. With this perspective, we think about the sample first and the NGS workflow second. The sequencer is an exceptionally honest reporter, but it can only report on what you give it, so whether you get clean, interpretable data from an NGS workflow is largely determined before you begin.

            Here are nine questions we think about, in roughly the order they matter, before...
            06-18-2026, 07:11 AM
          • SEQadmin2
            From Collection to Sequencing: Why Sample Preparation and Preservation Define Sequencing Data
            by SEQadmin2


            Data variability is still an issue in sequencing technologies despite the advances in reproducibility and accuracy of these platforms. But the problem does not originate in the sequencing itself, but in the previous steps, before the sample reaches the sequencer.


            The first step is collection, followed by preservation and sample preparation for analysis. Most scientists overlook those steps, but not being careful might just be skewing the experiment’s results.
            ...
            06-02-2026, 10:05 AM

          ad_right_rmr

          Collapse

          News

          Collapse

          Topics Statistics Last Post
          Started by SEQadmin2, 06-26-2026, 11:10 AM
          0 responses
          12 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Started by SEQadmin2, 06-17-2026, 06:09 AM
          0 responses
          48 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Started by SEQadmin2, 06-09-2026, 11:58 AM
          0 responses
          107 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Started by SEQadmin2, 06-05-2026, 10:09 AM
          0 responses
          125 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Working...