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

Input for cartesian plot #6

Closed
ASLeonard opened this issue Mar 29, 2021 · 2 comments
Closed

Input for cartesian plot #6

ASLeonard opened this issue Mar 29, 2021 · 2 comments

Comments

@ASLeonard
Copy link

I haven't run merfin yet for the illumina data I have yet, but wasn't entirely clear on the usage of the cartesian plot scripts. The input for cartesian_plot.R is the output of simplify_dump.sh, and the input for that should be $1=illumina.dump and $2=hifi.dump?

@ASLeonard
Copy link
Author

I tried it anyway with with cut ... $illum.dump | paste $hifi.dump - | ..., so the axes may be flipped from the labels.

This was using the merged hap1 + hap2 fasta file with hifi and short reads, but the short reads had fairly lower coverage (~16x).

merged correlation

There is an approximate R of -0.03, but the top three values below accounted for ~ 61% of all points, and so probably bias that heavily.

3185301570      0.00    0.00
348440924       0.00    -1.00
143715045       0.00    1.00

It is interesting that the two axes are pretty heavily populated, but not the diagonal. I guess this may demonstrates that kmer bias for hifi is pretty independent of kmer bias for short reads?

@arangrhie
Copy link
Owner

Hi @ASLeonard , just saw this now. Sorry for the silence!

Yes, as far as I can tell, the k-mer bias was independent, so to speak.
The different error modes in HiFi and Illumina seem to be the cause of this;
we found homopolymer and microsatellite contraction in HiFi reads and the long-known GC biases in Illumina reads as shown here in T2T-CHM13.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants