Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

sff_extract to support amplicon reads #6

Open
fangly opened this issue Nov 11, 2013 · 3 comments
Open

sff_extract to support amplicon reads #6

fangly opened this issue Nov 11, 2013 · 3 comments

Comments

@fangly
Copy link

fangly commented Nov 11, 2013

When using sff_extract (seq_crumbs 0.1.8) on SFF files that contain amplicon reads, I get the warning:


WARNING: weird sequences in file /srv/whitlam/bio/data/pyrotags/raw/Gasket67/Gasket67.sff
After applying left clips too many reads start with:
A
This does not look sane.
[...]


In my case, since the reads are not shotgun but amplicon, I do expect many reads to start with the same nucleotide. Would it be possible to add a flag called --amplicon to inform sff_extract that the input contains amplicon sequences and to not display this warning?

Thanks,

Florent

@fangly
Copy link
Author

fangly commented Nov 11, 2013

I now realize that the --max_percentage does exactly this, though I did not understand its meaning when initially reading the help page.

I suggest that you explain exactly what this option does in the help page, and mention that this is judicious to use -- max_percentage 100 when processing SFF files containing amplicon reads.

Best,

Florent

@JoseBlanca
Copy link
Owner

You right, we should write a manual.

@StuntsPT
Copy link

@fangly:
Sorry about the poor explanation. I wrote that option myself and submitted it to sff_extract. It was meant to be used with a lower value than the default 50% in shotgun reads.
I could never find a good way to explain what it does to someone who never used sff_extract before... But if you have a better suggestion on how to explain the option - I really would like to hear it, because I just can't seem to come up with a better one...

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants