You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
When the read maps to several places equally well and one of these mappings span exon/intron junction only one alignment is reported (alignment spanning exon/intron junction). I will provide test case:
file genome.fa:
but there should be two alignments. Note also that alignment is reported as unique (score 50 and NH:i:1), and when the user will filter uniquely mapped reads it will get many reads spanning exon/intron junctions that are actually not unique.
I tracked the problem to tophat/src/align_status.cpp:138 where score for alignments spanning exon/intron junctions is increased by 2, subsequently all other alignments will be considered as secondary since they have less score (by 2). I don't understand the reason for re-weighting scores of these alignments, but commenting out this line solves the problem.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
When the read maps to several places equally well and one of these mappings span exon/intron junction only one alignment is reported (alignment spanning exon/intron junction). I will provide test case:
file genome.fa:
file test.gtf:
file test.fq:
commands to run:
this will produce file tophat_out/accepted_hits.bam containing single alignment:
but there should be two alignments. Note also that alignment is reported as unique (score 50 and NH:i:1), and when the user will filter uniquely mapped reads it will get many reads spanning exon/intron junctions that are actually not unique.
I tracked the problem to tophat/src/align_status.cpp:138 where score for alignments spanning exon/intron junctions is increased by 2, subsequently all other alignments will be considered as secondary since they have less score (by 2). I don't understand the reason for re-weighting scores of these alignments, but commenting out this line solves the problem.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: