Question: PacBio long read error correction tools
0
gravatar for freddiejung
12 months ago by
freddiejung20
Japan
freddiejung20 wrote:

Dear all,

in my previous post (https://www.biostars.org/p/303214/#303734), some people suggested that it's better to correct errors in log reads from PacBio sequel using short reads from illumina ahead of the genome assembly.

I happened to find that the assembly with only short reads contains lots of mis-assembled loci. The assembled sequences did not match FISH data. Currently we suspect that the extremely similar repeated sequences dispersed among the genome caused the mis-assembly.

In this case, I felt that error-correcting software would not work well like LoRDEC or HALC that needs the assembly derived from short reads as input. Is this right?

If so, what kind of software is better to correct errors?

ADD COMMENTlink modified 12 months ago by lieven.sterck4.1k • written 12 months ago by freddiejung20

What is the scientific/biological question you are looking for an answer to?

Depending on your question there are different initial error correction bfx pipelines that are reccomeded for PacBio data.

ADD REPLYlink modified 12 months ago • written 12 months ago by tjduncan230

Did anyone use FMLRC (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5807796) or is HALC better?

ADD REPLYlink written 6 months ago by Ric190
0
gravatar for lieven.sterck
12 months ago by
lieven.sterck4.1k
VIB, Ghent, Belgium
lieven.sterck4.1k wrote:

The build-in error correction procedure of the CANU pipeline works quite well. That is however not using illumina data but only PacBio.

ADD COMMENTlink written 12 months ago by lieven.sterck4.1k
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: 2130 users visited in the last hour