Question: Why Pash 3.0 has been chosen for Roadmap Epigenome?
0
gravatar for Saulius Lukauskas
5.6 years ago by
London, UK
Saulius Lukauskas530 wrote:

I am going through the Roadmap Epigenome alignment protocols, and they claim they have mapped "a total of 150.21 billion sequencing reads onto hg19 assembly of the human genome using Pash 3.0 read mapper" .

Does anyone see the reasoning for using Pash 3.0 -- which is quite an odd choice given availability of more widely adopted aligners such as Bowtie or BWA? The latter two also support multithreading, something their aligner of choice lacks.

ADD COMMENTlink modified 5.6 years ago by Chris Miller21k • written 5.6 years ago by Saulius Lukauskas530
3

I don't know with any certainty (thus this is a comment), but I'd guess that Pash being able to handle normal and bisulfite treated read alignment played a role. Then at least there's just one single tool that can used for everything. I wouldn't have chosen that, but that's at least an argument in favor of Pash.
 

ADD REPLYlink modified 5.6 years ago • written 5.6 years ago by Devon Ryan97k
2
gravatar for Chris Miller
5.6 years ago by
Chris Miller21k
Washington University in St. Louis, MO
Chris Miller21k wrote:

The simple answer is that PASH is developed by the Milosavljevic lab, which is heavily involved in the consortium. 

That was my PhD lab, and I helped a little bit on the PASH paper, so can report that it's a decent enough algorithm. I haven't seen any benchmarking against the next gen of BS aligners recently, so can't offer any up-to-date insight on how it compares.

ADD COMMENTlink modified 5.6 years ago • written 5.6 years ago by Chris Miller21k

Hi Chris. I'm seeking to use the roadmap RNA-Seq data to identify and analyze splice sites active in each cell type. Is there some way to get these from the PASH output? Perhaps something analogous to the BowTie/TopHat Junction files? Right now I only seem to have access to PASH .bed outputs and am not familiar with the interpretation of columns 4-6 (e.g.)

chr1 22336244 22336343 HAL:1220:C0NTJACXX:3:1112:2443:33889 1 +
chr1 22336249 22336348 HAL:1220:C0NTJACXX:3:1112:3363:36331 1 -

Thanks!

ADD REPLYlink modified 4.4 years ago • written 4.4 years ago by bgulko0

Sorry, but I am not the right person to be asking about this at all. It's been 6 years since I used PASH. You're probably going to want to a) post this as a top-level question or b) email someone associated with the ongoing development of the algorithm.

ADD REPLYlink written 4.4 years ago by Chris Miller21k

@Chris Can you please help me with this question? Thanks

ADD REPLYlink written 3.6 years ago by Bioinformatist Newbie250
Please log in to add an answer.

Help
Access

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
Powered by Biostar version 2.3.0
Traffic: 2131 users visited in the last hour