Closed sklages closed 8 years ago
Hi,
It is likely that chromosome naming in maf file is inconsistent with the names in fasta files. For example, if "genome.fasta" contain sequences "seq1", "seq2", "seq3", they should correspond to "genome_name.seq1", "genome_name.seq2", "genome_name.seq3" in maf, where "genome_name" is the name you used in the recipe file to reference the corresponding genome.
This should fix you problem. However, maf input is currently deprecated, we are about to switch to HAL format completely. If you used progressiveCactus for alignment, then you should already have hal file (it is easier to use, as well).
Importantly, other alignment tools will likely not work good for synteny blocks recovery (at least, results would be unreliable), since alignment produced by progressiveCactus has some special properties, which other do not have (alignment is non-overlapping).
Yeah. That's it. Didn't read the naming requirements correctly ... As for progressiveCactus .. I read about the very long runtimes ..!?
It ,of course, depends on the number and size of genomes. But it's good, and finishes in reasonable time unless you want to align dozens/hundreds of mammalian genomes. Son.
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 3:43 AM, sklages notifications@github.com wrote:
Yeah. That's it. Didn't read the naming requirements correctly ... As for progressiveCactus .. I read about the very long runtimes ..!?
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/fenderglass/Ragout/issues/10#issuecomment-209874617
I'll try. thanks.
Hi,
running
ragout --outdir ragout_1.MAF.out --synteny maf --no-refine $(pwd)/athCun_vs_galGal.maf.rcp
resulted in a quite late error:Any idea what is going wrong here?
best, Sven