Closed lauradoepker closed 7 years ago
So... this is something I've been thinking a little bit about. I assumed that the seed belonged to one sample or the other, but the way things come out in the data it looks like it came from both, and we end up just picking one. So either:
2 is a lot easier, but 1 is probably a good idea anyway (for sanity).
I think let's do 2 for now, but in the course of reworking some of the dataflow from partis to cft, we can maybe look at cleaning this up.
Yes, to revisit the info on the seed itself: it came from a biological sort which was from an intermediate date between the two deep sequencing timepoints. It is in it's own 'time' category.
I think the best solution is to have the seeds be their own distinct color (not yellow or orange). I agree with Megan, they might as well be red because that's the color of the seed lineage anyway.
@metasoarous would you like the metadata on all the seeds? I can tell you the timepoints from which they came for the kate-QRS and laura-MB datasets. Let me know
Okay... intermediate timepoint corresponds with what I recall from my conversation with @psathyrella.
It's agreed; let's do the separate seedlineage color.
No rush on the seed metadata, but whenever you get around to it.
@metasoarous Here is the link to the metadata that we created a while ago. I've added timepoints to the seeds on the second sheet.
And here's the excel file for the laura-MB metadata so far (only for patient BF520). laura-mb-2016-12-22_library_metadata.xlsx
@metasoarous
Hi there - Megan again from Laura's account.
Thanks! Megan