Skip to content
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

Make "trimming-tool" optional #35

Open
coolkom opened this issue Oct 25, 2023 · 3 comments
Open

Make "trimming-tool" optional #35

coolkom opened this issue Oct 25, 2023 · 3 comments

Comments

@coolkom
Copy link

coolkom commented Oct 25, 2023

Hello,
I had a first look to grenepipe and first, thanks for a handy tool.
Would it be possible to make the "trimming-tool" step optional please ? Currently, valid values are: "adapterremoval", "cutadapt", "fastp", "seqprep", "skewer", "trimmomatic". But there are cases where you already have manually demultiplexed, removed adapters and trimmed the reads. So, the prepared fastq files could directly be used for mapping.
Thanks.

Cheers,
Coolkom.

@lczech
Copy link
Member

lczech commented Oct 27, 2023

Hi @coolkom,

thanks for the suggestion, that's a good idea. I'm a bit swamped with other things at the moment, and will likely not get to implement that in the next couple of weeks.

In the meantime, would it work for you to still run it with a trimming tool? I'm not sure how these tools exactly behave if there is nothing to trim, but chances are that they just don't do anything, and just output the input again. So then you would be able to use the rest of the pipeline then. But please check that ;-)

Cheers
Lucas

@coolkom
Copy link
Author

coolkom commented Oct 27, 2023

Thanks Lucas.
Yes I think that should be the behaviour if there is no adapters to remove or trimming to do. Just a waste of time and ressources dedicated to a useless step.
I will check.

Cheers,
Coolkom.

@lczech
Copy link
Member

lczech commented Oct 27, 2023

Okay, that makes sense. Let's keep the issue open for now, and I'll see when I get to implement this. But as long as it still works generally for you, that's good :-)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants