You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
the two input files have the same assembled genomes and NA as phenotype. I was expecting to get an identical number of nodes in the graph but I am getting a mismatch of a few million - 2,251,639 (Uniting-caller) and 7,022,727 (DBGWAS). Does Uniting-caller have a filtering threshold? Where does the difference come from?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
To make the graph, DBGWAS uses GATB, unitig-caller uses bifrost -- I would not guarantee that these graphs are identical. I don't know if the default k-mer length of both tools is the same. If you wanted to compare more thoroughly, I would suggest running bifrost and bcalm on your dataset. I don't think that unitig caller should be doing any additional filtering.
I am running
unitig-caller --call --reads input_reads.txt --out output_folder --threads 76 --pyseer
and
./DBGWAS -strains input_strains.txt -keepNA -output output_folder -nb-cores 76
the two input files have the same assembled genomes and NA as phenotype. I was expecting to get an identical number of nodes in the graph but I am getting a mismatch of a few million - 2,251,639 (Uniting-caller) and 7,022,727 (DBGWAS). Does Uniting-caller have a filtering threshold? Where does the difference come from?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: