Hi all, In our PCR free human genome libraries we routinely generate 100X coverage with about 3% duplicates (marked by Picard). Since dup marking is relatively slow and less paralellized in our pipeline than other processes we are wondering if any had any thoughts on how terrible it might be if we simply skipped the dup marking for the PCR free genomes.
Any thoughts?
•
written
by
richardc.gsc •
1 answer
My 2 cents:
You should not do it because you end removing sequences that are not duplicates but really two "independent" observations. However, my personal experience also tells me that you have duplicated clusters that are labeled as a single one. Perhaps you want to measure how endemic that effect is prior to doing something about it.
Log in to answer this question.
-
Tool: FastDup: A scalable, high-performance duplicate marking tool (20x faster than Picard with ide…
written by YeWen •
-
How to check for Over or Under-marking Duplicates in BAM files
written by noob@bioinfo •
-
scRNA-Seq GEX 5' v1.0 High Cell Count with Low Gene Count
written by tdfyoder •
-
ctDNA WES duplication rates from NovaSeq 6000 and HiSeq 4000
written by graeme.thorn
-
Removing duplicates in high coverage ancient DNA mitochondrial data
written by stolarek.ir
-
Method for analyzing Targeted re-sequencing based on Ligation Mediated PCR?
written by Sam
-
Very High Percentage Of Reads Are Pcr Duplicates - Iontorrent
written by Davy
-
Mate Pair Read Duplication Level
written by abc •
-
Somatic Sniper Producing Slightly Different Call Numbers Depending On Whether Duplicates Are Marked…
written by Travis
-
Library Duplicates Vs. Optical Duplicates (Picard Markduplicates)
written by toni
