The performance for the long read, and comparison with porechop
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 587
- Forks
- 144
- Avg merge
- 2h 37m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 1
Description
Hi, thank you very much for sharing this tool.
I would like to know two questions:
- what is the difference between cutadapt and porechop, which is another adapter trimming tool.
- How about the performance of cutadapt for long reads, like nanopore or pacbio sequencing data.
Thank you so much!
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
This is an informational request rather than a defined code change, and it names no files or tests. Research cutadapt and porechop for adapter-trimming differences and long-read performance on nanopore and PacBio data; done means providing a documented, evidence-based comparison.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- python
- Domain
- bioinformatics
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 20/100