Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

k-mer annotation #270

Open
beryl-au opened this issue Jul 12, 2024 · 6 comments
Open

k-mer annotation #270

beryl-au opened this issue Jul 12, 2024 · 6 comments

Comments

@beryl-au
Copy link

Hi,
We have run annotate_hits_pyseer to annotate k-mers.,but we are not sure if it has mapping quality when annotating k-mers? Do you have any suggestions?
Thank you in advance!

@johnlees
Copy link
Collaborator

Not in the output file, but they will appear in the bwa output (which you can direct with --tmp-prefix, but it will still be removed at the end of the run I think). You could just run bwa yourself with bwa mem -v 1 -k 8 ref.fa kmers.fa

@beryl-au
Copy link
Author

Thanks for your reply, if we use the annotation results( annotated_kmers.txt) of annotate_hits_pyseer directly for analysis, is there a mapping quality for such k-mer annotations?

@beryl-au beryl-au changed the title k-mer annotation# k-mer annotation Jul 15, 2024
@johnlees
Copy link
Collaborator

I think these are omitted in the output file sorry. @mgalardini does your new pipeline help with this at all?

@mgalardini
Copy link
Owner

No unfortunately, we are mapping k-mers back using a similar approach. @beryl-au, could you expand a bit on what you would like the mapping quality for? it could be interesting to implement

@beryl-au
Copy link
Author

Possibly similar to some of the literature restricting the analysis to reads with a minimum mapping quality of 10 or 20 to determine confident mappings?

@mgalardini
Copy link
Owner

Sure, that seems like an interesting use case, although usually you would be mapping unitigs back to the same genomes it came from, and so I expect most (?) mappings to be exact matches. Worth looking into eventually though

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants