Entering edit mode
7.1 years ago
AP
▴
80
Hello everyone,
I was not sure if my RNA sequence data were strand specific or not. So while doing the transcript count using Htseq-count, I tried both options and saw there was difference in result. With option stranded=no I found the following result
__no_feature 2924817
__ambiguous 23189
__too_low_aQual 0
__not_aligned 0
__alignment_not_unique 8855974
With option stranded=yes I found the following result
__no_feature 20203107
__ambiguous 163
__too_low_aQual 0
__not_aligned 0
__alignment_not_unique 8855974
This was the result for same sample. As we can see there lots of no feature counts in stranded than in non stranded. Can you please suggest whats going on here and on which I should stick to for further analysis. Will appreciate your suggestions.
Thank you,
Ambika
Try
stranded=reverse
, sincestranded=yes
libraries haven't been made in years.Thank you, will try it and post the results.
@Devon Ryan
This is my output from stranded=reverse for same sample. What would you suggest me to go for? I am so confused with these results.
A dUTP-based library prep was performed,
stranded=reverse
is the correct setting.RSeQC infer_experiment.py may be of help in your situation.
Thank you for suggestions.
You are welcome.
Did you try it? I am sure it would help clarify your confusion.
Besides, something I should have asked from the beginning: what kit did you (or your sequencing provider used to prepare the sequencing library?
H mon, I contacted them and just found out that they did Directional RNAseq. So they made stranded libraries, but in here if we look at my results we find lots of no feature counts on stranded=yes when compared with others. what does this mean? Is it ok to have many no feature counts?
"Directional RNAseq" is not the name of a library prep kit. But taking into account "Directional RNAseq" and your counts, you have to use
stranded=reverse
.If you are so overwhelmed at this step, I strongly suggest you should contact a local bioinformatician for help / teaching / collaboration.
Thank you so much for your suggestions.