Do I need to assume differences in coverage profile when I compare the first reads from paired end data with single end read data?
I am considering feeding paired-end sequencing data into a bioinformatics workflow for coverage profiling which is actually adapted to single-end reads. So my plan is to use only the first reads as input.
My question now is whether I have to assume systematic differences in the resulting coverage (given identical read lengths), or whether I can expect that the coverage resulting from single-end reads and the first read from PE data are comparable in principle. Does anyone have experience with this?
Many thanks in advance!
• 1,763 views
•
link
updated
by
GenoMax
•
written
by
corinna.ernst •
•
written
by
corinna.ernst •
1 answer
Log in to answer this question.
More posts like this
-
Optimal MACS2/3 configuration for paired-end ChIP-seq data: `-f BAM` versus `-f BAMPE`
written by kalavattam •
-
HTSeq count stranded setting
written by ExtentHonest56 •
-
Extract mapped SE and properly paired PE reads from a bam file
written by Jautis
-
K-mer coverage of metgenomic data, what is the uper limit of K?
written by robert.murphy •
-
weird distribution of intronic reads in single-nuclei data
written by Tim Padvitski •
-
Comparing single end and paired end TPM data
written by rzm0015 •
-
Are single-end reads processed the same as paired-end reads regarding strandedness?
written by sg197 •
-
Peak call? or Just convert to bedfile by bedtools bamtobed? to generate the accessibility matrix of…
written by soya •
-
Trimmomatic- PE reads number not identical
written by Pragy30 •
-
Peak calling on FastX-collapser processed data
written by kevt1999 •
