-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 11
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
Less BUSCO genes after scaffolding. #5
Comments
Hi,
In this example (.tsv output of a long read scaffolding run), a 2.4 Mb scaffold and a 3.3 Mb scaffold are merged into a 3.3 Mb scaffold.
|
Hi ! Yes I found the problem ! I used OPERA to perform scaffolding of my Sanger assembly with PacBio reads and I saw that OPERA merged some contigs, generating this problem with BUSCO. As OPERA generates a file giving scaffolding information, I wrote a script to perform "manual" scaffolding without merging my contigs and it's perfect ! BUSCO is very good after that. If someone encounters such problems with OPERA, contact me and I will provide my script. Thank you, |
Hi Amandine @a-velt I face the same question now. Could you share your script with me? Thanks in advances |
Hi,
I would just like to make a return on the scaffolding of my assembly (Sanger technology) with PacBio reads (30x coverage), by using pyScaf.
pyScaf is fast and generates interesting results in the first place. I went from 2,059 scaffolds to 1,344 scaffolds, which was encouraging. Then I launched BUSCO on both assemblies and got the following results :
95.6% of complete BUSCO genes for my assembly (before pyScaf) and 78.7% of complete BUSCO genes after pyScaf. Before scaffolding, I have 37 missing genes, after pyScaf I have 284 missing genes.
I launched pyScaf with these parameters :
pyScaf.py -f Scaffolds.fasta --identity 0.80 -o Scaffolds.pyScaf.fasta -t 10 --log pyScaf_run.log --longreads all_raw_reads.Pacbio.fasta
Maybe I have to change them ? Do you have any advice to me?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: