Open nservant opened 1 year ago
the issue is also true for the file mosdepth.region.dist.txt
Thanks for the clear report. I see what you mean. Due to the way I wrote that part, it's not an easy fix. I'll have a closer look next week but it might be that this will remain a (now) known issue.
Thank you @nservant for documenting this issue, I've run into the same unfortunately.
Any progress on a fix? If not, can you note this behavior more prominentely in the README as a known issue? It's not a "known" issue otherwise.
I'm using mosdepth to evaluate regional enrichment from Oxford Nanopore adaptive sampling. The difference between total_region
and manual calculation from region.bed.gz
changed our wet bench plans for a re-run of valuable samples. I sent this issue to colleagues who have been relying on tailing summary.txt
as well.
We're running version 0.3.6 from bioconda. Thank you, really appreciate the speed and ease of use of the package for this application.
Hi,
We had an issue which might be interesting for you (and other users). Whe have a WES sample, and after a bug on a storage system, we only get reads on the chr1 after doing an
intersectBed
of thebam
with thebed
target file. Nothing related tomostdepth
so far.However, when we compute the coverage of this bam file with ;
It reports a very high total mean coverage (181.34X) in the summary file (
grep total_region
)So to me this is misleading, as the
total_region
does not seem to take into account the full bed, but only the non-zero chromosomes.Of note, this is confirmed using the
regions.bed.gz
file but the 'real' mean coverage should be 18.36X.