Question: KEGG annotation results and transcriptome assembly quality
0
gravatar for seta
5.1 years ago by
seta1.4k
Sweden
seta1.4k wrote:

Hi friends,

I used KAAS for KEGG annotation of a de novo assembled transcriptome from a non-model plant. I selected just available plant species in the organism list and bi-directional best hit (BBH) method for KO assignment. But, I surprised with the results since some of uncommon pathway like those involved in the Huntington's disease, Alzheimer's disease, etc represented with about many hits, and there was not any represented pathway specific to my experimental condition. The results scared me about the quality of transcriptome assembly. Could you please let me know how I can explain these results? Actually this assembly was made on about 340 million PE, 100bp reads, is it possible just highly abundant transcripts (that have universal function) represented in the my assembly due to high coverage?

Sharing your experience with me is really kind of you.

 

 

 

ADD COMMENTlink written 5.1 years ago by seta1.4k

similar thing happened to us, with our data as well. we work on fish species, but we see some wierd pathways like cancer etc. Do not know what the reason might be. Would like to hear from an expert in the forum.

ADD REPLYlink modified 5.1 years ago • written 5.1 years ago by Prakki Rama2.4k
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: 1185 users visited in the last hour