I am looking for a paired end merging utility similar to FLASH or PEAR that also outputs statistical information, mainly number of pair mismatches.
Is this type of information available from a SAM file after alignment with BOWTIE, BWA or some other aligner?
•
written
by
jomo018
1 answer
BBMerge can do this, with the "ecco" flag, which rather than combining the reads, just does error-correction via overlap:
bbmerge.sh in=reads.fq ecco mix out=corrected.fq
Total time: 1.890 seconds.
Pairs: 1000000
Joined: 182539 18.254%
Ambiguous: 817461 81.746%
No Solution: 0 0.000%
Too Short: 0 0.000%
Errors Corrected: 6994
Avg Insert: 159.9
Standard Deviation: 21.5
Mode: 187
Insert range: 100 - 191
90th percentile: 186
75th percentile: 178
50th percentile: 164
25th percentile: 145
10th percentile: 128
Yep, the syntax can also be:
bbmerge.sh in1=r1.fq in2=r2.fq ecco mix out1=corrected1.fq out2=correct2.fq
...but I normally show the interleaved version of the command for conciseness.
No, it is the total number of bases corrected.
"qtrim" tells the program which end to trim, while "trimq" specifies the quality threshold. Only ends can be trimmed (and mainly the right end is the important one for trimming with respect to merging). "qtrim=r trimq=15" will trim the bases on the right end such that the region trimmed has an average quality below 15, while the remaining region has an average quality at least 15. For example, if the last 5 base qualities were "20, 0, 17, 19, 16", then the last 4 bases would be trimmed as that region has an average quality below 15 (not that 0 is an N) but the 20 would not be trimmed. It's a little hard to calculate by eye because the scores are first transformed to the probability scale (where 16 is roughly 2.5% chance of error) before being averaged. Low-quality bases are not considered N. Rather, if two reads mismatch at a location and one is higher quality than the other, the base with the higher quality is assumed correct and the resuting quality score is higher-lower.
Log in to answer this question.
-
How to discard alignments from SAM/BAM file that have mismatches
written by Mo •
-
Uniquely mapped paired-end reads on the same chromosome
written by barzilayrom1 •
-
Using paired-end date as single-end for mapping with bwa mem. Good, bad or ugly?
written by resug •
-
Can FASTQ header tags be added to SAM file output from bowtie2 ?
written by manojkumar_bhosale
-
bowtie (1) 0% alignment on paired-end RNAseq data
written by gulamaltab •
-
Join mapped, overlapping, paired-end reads
written by Mr. Dave •
-
Manually edit the flags in a sam file
written by DVA
-
report all possible alignments
written by cmo
-
is there a post to summarize the attribute tag (optional field) of tophat output bam file?
written by zju.whw •
-
Distance Between Mate Pairs
written by Mohamed •
Hi, I think your information about number of pair mismatches (if you speak about your reads merged) is the consequences of your alignment then step 2 :) You can simply got the information if you compare the number of reads aligned between merged reads and no merged reads.
I am looking for mismatches in base resolution, not read resolution. Pairs can be merged (or aligned concordantly) even if some overlapping bases disagree. I am looking for the number or rate of these mismatching bases.
Do you mean variant calling ?
You can call it variant calling where one mate declares different base than the other.