Question: question about calling peak by macs2
0
gravatar for ch8316f5eyu
8 months ago by
ch8316f5eyu10
ch8316f5eyu10 wrote:

I found the result of macs2 is not perfect and I want to know why. Firstly, I briefly describe the ChIP I made: The sequencing files are paired-end. Because of poor sequencing depth, I merge two input and two IP sample into one input and one sample. After processing the raw fastq files, I used bowtie2 to map these reads. Then I used macs2 to call peak.

macs2 callpeak -t IP_mm10.bam -c Input.bam --outdir . -n IP -g 2652783500 -q 0.1 -f BAMPE --keep-dup all -B

Because I am interested repeat region, I retaind all duplicated. I found the effective genome size from deeptools for mm10. I think the process is OK, but the result is weird. The input file also has peaks, And the score is high. Screen Shot 2018 09 21 at 10 23 29 PM Screen_Shot_2018_09_21_at_10_38_23_PM

The two files are bigwig files converted by bamcoverage. Is my code wrong?

chip-seq • 405 views
ADD COMMENTlink modified 8 months ago by goodez460 • written 8 months ago by ch8316f5eyu10
1

I found the result of macs2 is not perfect and I want to know why.

I don't understand what the problem is. Your workflow sounds okay, but what exactly is your question? Also you can use -g mm instead of using -g 2652783500. MACS2 has a predefined size for common genomes like mm10 or hg38.

I think the process is OK, but the result is weird.

I don't think anyone can help much when we don't know what you mean by "weird". We also don't know what kind of ChIP this is, so I have no idea what to expect.

ADD REPLYlink written 8 months ago by goodez460

I mean the good peak is that the IP sample has enrichment and input hasn't enrichment. In the two examples I show, the input sample also has enrichment on the peak called by macs2. I consider it strange. I am sorry for ambiguity.

ADD REPLYlink written 8 months ago by ch8316f5eyu10

Can you see the image I upload? The images show the peaks where IP and input both are enriched. This is my first time to upload image.

ADD REPLYlink written 8 months ago by ch8316f5eyu10

Yes I do see the images although they are very small. I agree it does look like there is not much enrichment of IP over the Input. However I noticed the scales for your IGV tracks are different. You should highlight both tracks, then right click and select the group autoscale. This way you can actually compare them on the same scale.

You did use -q 0.1, which allows more insignificant peaks than the default value setting of -q 0.05. Even then, I don't think you should get peaks for the regions which you showed. Can you also switch to -g mm because your genome size seems too big.

ADD REPLYlink written 8 months ago by goodez460

I order the table by negative log10qvalue, and these examples are the second one and the third one. The first one is also strange. I would not worry about some exception. I do change the parameter as you said and the result remains the same with less peak number. I think the calling peak is more about the peak shape than the reads number. This is the fourth one: Screen_Shot_2018_09_22_at_12_50_00_AM

So I really think there is something wrong with my code and I do not know.

ADD REPLYlink written 8 months ago by ch8316f5eyu10
0
gravatar for goodez
8 months ago by
goodez460
United States
goodez460 wrote:

I would not expect MACS2 to call peaks for the regions you show, based on the tracks in your pictures. This makes me think you might have some errors in the track files themselves.

The two files are bigwig files converted by bamcoverage.

So maybe the peaks are correct, which were found using the original bam files. If you post the code used to generate the bigwigs file, the problem may become clear.

ADD COMMENTlink written 8 months ago by goodez460

It confused me either. This time I show the bam file directly: Screen_Shot_2018_09_22_at_6_47_57_AM
mass of alcl3

Screen_Shot_2018_09_22_at_6_51_50_AM
mass of alcl3

Here is my bowtie2 code:

bowtie2 -5 1 --very-sensitive -p 20 -I 0 -X 1000 --no-mixed --no-discordant --un-conc-gz Input_R%_un.fq.gz --met-file Input.met -x mm10 -1 Input_R1.fq.gz -2 Input_R2.fq.gz | samtools view -b | samtools sort > Input.bam&&

samtools index Input.bam

ADD REPLYlink written 8 months ago by ch8316f5eyu10

So what I meant was your bam files are probably okay, which is why macs2 calls peaks. BUT when you made the bigwig files, which you are viewing on IGV, you may have mixed something up. I think that both of your bigwig files may be using the input bam file in some way.

ADD REPLYlink written 8 months ago by goodez460
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: 2022 users visited in the last hour