Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(4)
Sequencing reads of both libraries covered the + and − bisulfite converted references more than 270 times.
Matches to the reverse complement of the + and − bisulfite converted references were discarded, since only one strand was amplified during library construction and thus matches to the reverse complement are mismatches.
In order to find those methylated Cs, the uniquely mapped reads (to the + and − bisulfite converted references) were first analyzed using the SNP pipeline of the SOLiD™ System Analysis Pipeline Tool.
Two bisulfite converted references (+ and − strands) were created by replacing in silico all Cs to Ts in the sense and antisense strands of the DH10B genome (GenBank accession CP000948), respectively.
Similar(55)
Thus, two bisulfite converted reference sequences were created in silico from DH10B by replacing all Cs with Ts for the + and the − strand, respectively (+/− bisulfite converted reference).
All 52 or 54 (+ or − bisulfite converted reference, respectively) CYWGG sites that were found in the bis-gel library were also present in the bis-sol library.
The total number of matches to the bisulfite converted reference (as shown in table 2) can be obtained by adding up all reads mapped to both the + and − bisuflite converted reference.
In both libraries (bis-sol and bis-gel) ∼60% of total reads could be matched uniquely ( = each read maps to one single position on the reference sequence) to the +/− bisulfite converted reference sequence.
Therefore, reads that were erroneously mapped to the reverse-complement strand of the + or − bisulfite converted reference were removed from the mapping file, and the new file was put through the Analysis Pipeline Tool again to obtain the correct mapping statistics.
The C2T converted reference genome was derived by converting all cytosines to thymines.
The G2A converted reference genome was derived by converting all guanines to adenosines.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com