Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

1.2 Million Identical Warnings is a bit Verbose #915

Open
bklein345 opened this issue Feb 20, 2020 · 3 comments
Open

1.2 Million Identical Warnings is a bit Verbose #915

bklein345 opened this issue Feb 20, 2020 · 3 comments

Comments

@bklein345
Copy link

@bklein345 bklein345 commented Feb 20, 2020

  • Search whether this issue (or a similar issue) has been solved before
    using the search tab above. Link the previous issue if appropriate below.

  • Paste your deepTools version (deeptools --version) and your python
    version (python --version) below.
    deeptools 3.3.2
    Python 3.6.0

  • Paste the full deepTools command that produces the issue below
    (ignore if you simply spotted the issue in the code/documentation).
    computeGCBias
    --bamfile $bam
    --effectiveGenomeSize $genome_size
    --genome $fasta_2bit
    --GCbiasFrequenciesFile $output
    --blackListFileName $blacklist_bed
    --verbose
    --biasPlot $plot_out
    --regionSize $region_size

  • Paste the output printed on screen from the command that produces the issue
    below (ignore if you simply spotted the issue in the code/documentation).
    WARNING: too many NNNs present in 1:0-176
    WARNING: too many NNNs present in 1:62-238
    WARNING: too many NNNs present in 1:124-300
    WARNING: too many NNNs present in 1:186-362
    WARNING: too many NNNs present in 1:248-424
    WARNING: too many NNNs present in 1:310-486
    WARNING: too many NNNs present in 1:372-548
    ....
    Repeated ~1.2million times.

@dpryan79
Copy link
Collaborator

@dpryan79 dpryan79 commented Feb 20, 2020

computeGCBias is fairly deprecated, are you sure you need to run it at all with modern data?

@bklein345
Copy link
Author

@bklein345 bklein345 commented Feb 20, 2020

I was under the impression that I would need to account for GC bias in order to achieve accurate measurements of ploidy. The manuscript by Benjamini proposed a reasonable means to do so, and I assumed that was implemented in this tool here. I'm curious what you mean when you ask if this is necessary with modern data. Does modern data not suffer from GC bias? Furthermore, if the tool is deprecated, do you have suggestions for alternatives?

@dpryan79
Copy link
Collaborator

@dpryan79 dpryan79 commented Feb 20, 2020

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked pull requests

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

None yet
2 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.