Open
Conversation
Author
|
Note: This issue with template lengths is also there in the coverage track command. Not sure whether you want to fix that or just use one read for coverage, but I'm seeing some extreme outliers due to very high GC tagged weights (>50). |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Hi Rafeed,
When tagging the BAM file, only one read per fragment were written.
The issue was that the template length was used directly as fragment length. But half of the reads have negative template lengths, so it needs to be the absolute value instead.
There was also a hardcoded 51bp minimum length which would lead to errors if another minimum length is selected by the user. So I set that to the start_len instead.
Note that the changes from #2 is also in this. So you could either merge that first or only merge this one.
Best,
Ludvig