Timeline for Counts obtained by featureCounts seem much less than observed coverage
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 20, 2017 at 11:54 | comment | added | bli | @KonradRudolph To me, this indicates that the mapper does a "good" random assignment of reads when multiple equally-scoring mapping locations are possible (his-15 and his-11 have identical sequences). I'm more worried about the reads that are split between two his-* genes. This is most likely wrong. | |
| Jul 20, 2017 at 11:45 | comment | added | Konrad Rudolph | From the screenshot it seems that his-11 and his-15 have virtually identical (not merely similar) peak shapes. That should give pause. | |
| Jul 19, 2017 at 23:09 | vote | accept | bli | ||
| Jul 19, 2017 at 21:16 | answer | added | Devon Ryan | timeline score: 4 | |
| Jul 19, 2017 at 17:44 | comment | added | Devon Ryan | well there's the cause. | |
| Jul 19, 2017 at 17:04 | comment | added | bli | About 62% of the reads appear to have the "secondary alignment" flag bit, and almost 95% have the value for the NH tag higher than 1. | |
| Jul 19, 2017 at 16:44 | comment | added | Devon Ryan | How many of those are labeled as multimappers? Those are excluded by default. | |
| Jul 19, 2017 at 13:41 | history | asked | bli | CC BY-SA 3.0 |