Hi I have done the trimming of my reads using cutadapt after trimming i did FASTQC and find that three modules
- Per Base Sequence Content
- Over represented sequences
- Sequence Length Distribution
- Per Sequence GC Content
- Kmer Content
they all failed. But I still went ahead and tried aligning the reads using bowtie2 with the following command
bowtie2 -p 8 -x ../hg38_index/index -X 300 --no-unal --time --no-mixed --local --dovetail --very-sensitive -1 Lmin6-ChIP-41650664/trim_cutadapt/trim_Lmin6_chip_R1.fastq.gz -2 Lmin6-ChIP-41650664/trim_cutadapt/trim_Lmin6_chip_R2.fastq.gz -S Lmin6-ChIP-41650664/Lmin6_chip.sam
I got the following error with the bowtie2
Warning: minimum score function gave negative number in --local mode for mate #2 of read 'M00546:70:000000000-ANJWB:1:1107:18525:13236 2:N:0:CGATGT; setting to 0 instead
Warning: skipping mate #1 of read 'M00546:70:000000000-ANJWB:1:1107:18525:13236 1:N:0:CGATGT' because length (0) <= # seed mismatches (0)
Warning: skipping mate #2 of read 'M00546:70:000000000-ANJWB:1:1107:18525:13236 2:N:0:CGATGT' because length (0) <= # seed mismatches (0)
Warning: skipping mate #1 of read 'M00546:70:000000000-ANJWB:1:1107:18525:13236 1:N:0:CGATGT' because it was < 2 characters long
Warning: skipping mate #2 of read 'M00546:70:000000000-ANJWB:1:1107:18525:13236 2:N:0:CGATGT' because it was < 2 characters long
Warning: minimum score function gave negative number in --local mode for mate #1 of read 'M00546:70:000000000-ANJWB:1:1107:16473:13334 1:N:0:CGATGT; setting to 0 instead
Warning: minimum score function gave negative number in --local mode for mate #2 of read 'M00546:70:000000000-ANJWB:1:1107:16473:13334 2:N:0:CGATGT; setting to 0 instead
Warning: skipping mate #1 of read 'M00546:70:000000000-ANJWB:1:1107:16473:13334 1:N:0:CGATGT' because length (0) <= # seed mismatches (0)
Warning: skipping mate #2 of read 'M00546:70:000000000-ANJWB:1:1107:16473:13334 2:N:0:CGATGT' because length (0) <= # seed mismatches (0)
Warning: skipping mate #1 of read 'M00546:70:000000000-ANJWB:1:1107:16473:13334 1:N:0:CGATGT' because it was < 2 characters long
Warning: skipping mate #2 of read 'M00546:70:000000000-ANJWB:1:1107:16473:13334 2:N:0:CGATGT' because it was < 2 characters long
Warning: minimum score function gave negative number in --local mode for mate #1 of read 'M00546:70:000000000-ANJWB:1:1107:14918:13429 1:N:0:CGATGT; setting to 0 instead
Warning: minimum score function gave negative number in --local mode for mate #2 of read 'M00546:70:000000000-ANJWB:1:1107:14918:13429 2:N:0:CGATGT; setting to 0 instead
I tried another thing did the alignment using the untrimmed files and then the command worked perfectly. so want some suggestion if I did any thing wrong in the trimming. I used the following command for trimming
~/.local/bin/cutadapt -a AGATCGGAAGAGCACACGTCTGAACTCCAGTCAC -A AGATCGGAAGAGCGTCGTGTAGGGAAAGAGTGTAGATCTCGGTGGTCGCCGTATCATT \
-o Lmin6-ChIP-41650664/trim_cutadapt/trim_Lmin6_chip_R1.fastq.gz \
-p Lmin6-ChIP-41650664/trim_cutadapt/trim_Lmin6_chip_R2.fastq.gz Lmin6-ChIP-41650664/Lmin6-ChIP_S1_L001_R1_001.fastq.gz Lmin6-ChIP-41650664/Lmin6-ChIP_S1_L001_R2_001.fastq.gz
I will be happy if some kind suggestions are there for this problem.
Thanks
cutadapt can be run in paired end mode and told to drop pairs where one read is shorter than a certain length. I generally drop anything shorter than 15 or 20bp
Thanks for your suggestions i think you are right but one more query the warning says that skipping mate means they were already dropped during the alignment???
It looks like those are length-0 reads. Not much there to align :)
Hi Brian, I had a similar warnings for many many reads in my log file: Warning: skipping read #### because length (1) <= # seed mismatches (0) Warning: skipping read #### because it was < 2 characters long. I was using kneaddata with bowtie2.
My question is that how to find out if I really have many short reads and if the number is high how to tackle the issue?
Hope you can help me with this.
Looking forward to your reply. thank you
Dear pdhrati02 Given the age of this question and the slight difference in your question, I think you would be better off starting a new question.