-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
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
Tuning Parameters for Plant Assembly #35
Comments
Can you provide detailed commands and input data statistics, also NextPolish2 version. |
Thank you for the quick response. Here are the commands we used: $minimap2 samtools index hifi.map.sort.bam; yak count yak count nextPolish2 -t 20 hifi.map.sort.bam ../../1_Assemblaggio/HIFIASM/q30/raw_assembly.fasta k21.yak k31.yak -o asm.np2.fa And the input statistics:
best, |
|
Hi,
We are looking to optimize the polishing step for reconstructing a plant genome using PacBio HiFi reads (Q30). Specifically, we tested both NextPolish and NextPolish2, followed by a variant calling step on both the raw assembly and the polished genome in order to evaluate the polishing impact.
With NextPolish, we observed a significant reduction in homozygous INDELs (from 3,420 to 945), as expected, but also an increase in homozygous SNPs (from 853 to 2,678). In contrast, using NextPolish2 led to a slight increase in both homozygous INDELs (from 3,420 to 3,741) and SNPs (from 853 to 862).
For NextPolish2, we used the default Yak k-mer sizes (21 and 31) and the default minimap2 alignment settings.
My question is: Are there optimal parameters recommended for polishing a plant genome using NextPolish2?
Thank you in advance for your help.
Best regards,
Federico
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: