Should I be concerned with the per base ratio content despite having good quality scoring on every base position? 
•
written
by
minifoog •
1 answer
If you are concerned about the bias observed in the first 9 bases, that is absolutely normal in Illumina sequencing when a mechanical method of breaking the DNA to get the shotgun fragments in used. It turn out that DNA is more fragile in some sequences, and this is why you see it
It does not affect your analysis
I see in the second graphic a high quality even at the end
If you don't see GC bias and the presence of adapters and/or a high level of duplicated or overrepresented sequences, I would say that sequencing went just fine and you do not require to filter. You did not mention whether DNA or RNA is used
Log in to answer this question.
-
FastQC interpretation - 16S sequencing
written by Christopher •
-
Bacterial RNA-SEQ - Quality Control
written by Sammy •
-
RNAseq fastqc report some failures, how to solve it?
written by lovelymaoqin •
-
3' Tag-Seq / DE Analysis - FASTQC detects overrepresented sequences as well as fails per base & GC …
written by gmchaput •
-
Per base sequence quality and per base N content
written by misterie
-
High A in "Per base sequence content" of fastQC report
written by DVA
-
FastQC low %A in per base sequence content
written by Duff
-
small rnaseq data quality question - before using mirdeep2
written by datanerd
-
Should I remove Kmers identified in FastQC?
written by Randomguy •
-
Why does this plot of human GC-content have a peak at around 60%
written by willj •
Going to leave a link for a blog post FastQC developers have on this very topic for future visitors to this thread. As Antonio said below nothing to worry about.