-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
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
promoter questions #3
Comments
Hello Carl, To answer your questions:
Yes this is correct that there will not be a gene table entry for a region from the query regions if it does not overlap with any gene. All query regions do appear in the "context" table, but will only appear in the genes or features tables if the query region does indeed overlap with one of those subjects.
This is a good question, as
This is the percentage of the query region (given by chr/start/end of that row) that is overlapped by the promoter of the isoform given in "isoform.id" of that row. I should point out that the |
I believe I have found the source of this bug, and it was due to strand not being ignored in the Note that Goldmine was written to ignore strand information for simplicity of implementation, and strand should have been ignored here as well. (Stranded analyses are however supported by pre-splitting the query, genes, and features and running I created a branch called library(devtools)
install_github("jeffbhasin/goldmine",ref="issue-3") Thanks very much for finding this and please let me know if you have any additional questions! |
Hi Jeff, Thanks for your reply, and I now have a couple of new questions. Q4. Re SNRNP40, I'm not sure how to get the result 3.62% for overlap of the promoter. I keep getting ~0.9%.
Q5. In my original example code above, I meant to use
Please advise, thanks. Best, |
Hello Carl, I investigated your question Q5 first, and found that this was due to the set of query ranges being a case where there were no intron/exon overlaps. Some code was running that only applies in case there are intron/exon overlaps, so I corrected the error by conditioning the processing over the intron/exon overlap table on there being actual overlap. Before I had really only run Goldmine on datasets with at least one exon/intron overlap where this case didn't arise. You can see the commits to fix this issue here: 138a66f and c2bae07 and you can test it by pulling the latest commit from the "issue-3" branch as before. Please let me know if any further issues. I will investigate your Q4 next. Jeff |
Hello Carl, The below code appended to the end of your own gives the 3.62 value, accounting for the off-by-in in our promoter conventions. 100*(sizeDmrIntersectPromoter2-1)/size(dmr2) Jeff Updated: I edited my comment because I think this is consistent with my answer to Q3 |
Hello Jeff, I tried your updated version...
... and it seems that another, perhaps old, problem as (re)arisen. With the following code (tl;dr - please excuse my admittedly lengthy attempt at a simple, reproducible example)...
...I got the following output...
...wherein it appears that the second of the two results from In particular in forming Hope this helps. Best, |
Dear Team,
First, thanks for all your efforts - in particular for encapsulating in goldmine and abbreviating what has been many a previous effort in mapping DM results to a RefSeq genome.
Please excuse if the following are not so much issues but questions about the code, which presumably then is working as designed.
Q1. Given a query range that overlaps a promoter of a subject gene for which there is no entry in the resulting goldmine
gene
table (such as row 1 in the exampledmrQuery
below), then is it true that there is no such entry in the resulting goldminegene
table since the given query range does not overlap with the subject gene body?Q2. Given a query range that results in a value of
promoter_per
> 100 (such as row 2 in the exampledmrQuery
below), what is the meaning ofcontext$promoter_per
in this case?Q3. What is the meaning of
gene$Promoter
?Best,
Carl B.
Here's example code.
Here's the output.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: