Question: Very different result from chip-sea data between mm9 and mm10 using galaxy. Is that normal?
gravatar for iriskye
4.0 years ago by
United States
iriskye0 wrote:

I first mapped to mm10 with bowtie and them did peak calling with macs using genome size 1800000000. Returned 6,632 regions with 3100+ for those high score peaks. 



Then I wanted to use the histone modification etc. data from encode but those are in mm9 so I repeat everything using mm9 with all the other parameters the same except the genome size 1865500000 (which I assume it's not much difference) And I chose 'Perform the new peak detection method (futurefdr)' for mm9. However only 3,535 regions returned with high scores at ~1500. 

I am confident for the mm10 analysis. But can't understand why mm9 result differs so much. 

Thanks to anybody who can help me with that. 






chip-seq • 1.5k views
ADD COMMENTlink written 4.0 years ago by iriskye0

what happens if you run MACS with the same peak detection method (not the "futurefdr") on mm9?

and why are you convinced that the 6,600 peaks for mm10 are fine, but the 3,500 for mm9 aren't?

ADD REPLYlink written 4.0 years ago by Friederike3.6k

Use exact commands while running macs, except the genome size. Instead of looking at the numbers, can you compare the peak coordinates, using tools like LiftOver ? Then find out which are missing and look the missed regions in genome browser and check if you can figure out something. 

ADD REPLYlink modified 4.0 years ago • written 4.0 years ago by geek_y9.4k

Are you using a control mapped to the appropriate reference?

ADD REPLYlink written 4.0 years ago by Michele Busby1.9k
Please log in to add an answer.


Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
Powered by Biostar version 2.3.0
Traffic: 715 users visited in the last hour