Thank you for your answer!
• 0 views
•
link
written
by
Zeng Jingyu •
Is therer any suggestions on mapping rate of WGBS data?
Hi everyone,
I'm recently working on a batch of WGBS data, we are evaluating the sequencing outcome.
We used BitMapperBS to align the reads, but the mapping rate of our samples varies in different samples from ~65% to ~75%.
I wonder if there's any standard in WGBS mapping rate? It's my first time working on WGBS data and the mapping rate is obviously too low compared to the WGS data I used to handle. We need some criteria to filter the samples and understand the sequence qualities.
By the way, the average sequencing depth is ~30X.
• 1,709 views
•
link
written
by
Zeng Jingyu •
1 answer
Mapping rate for bisulfite data is typically worse because of reduced complexity of the sequences. The efficiency will depend on your read length though, also on the species being mapped, aligner used, etc. In my personal experience mapping rates from 65-75% (using Bismark) in mouse/human are often observed for samples with decent/good quality.
Log in to answer this question.
More posts like this
-
Tools for Subsampling Paired-End Reads to 25X Coverage ?
written by Sony Nguyen •
-
Is there any information about the reads duplication rate and sequencing reads length?
written by Zeng Jingyu •
-
Optical Duplicates
written by ebogen •
-
High amount of intronic/intergenic reads in SMARTer stranded total bulk RNAseq
written by Mat •
-
Why is my miRNA-seq mapping rate so low?
written by cecilomar6 •
-
Publicly Available WGS Samples for Panel of Normals?
written by tjbencomo •
-
number of cycles, Nextseq500, for whole exoems equencing, which option is more efficient?
written by lait
-
Mapping quality in Oxford Nanopore
written by rah •
-
Mouse RNASeq, 50% discordant reads
written by jc.szamosi •
-
Ideal practice to manage huge NGS dataset/Intermediate files of Whole Genome Human sequencing
written by ravi.uhdnis
