On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 7:31 PM, Jennifer Jackson <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Peng,
>
> The UCSC Genes track is more discriminatory, with only one mapping. Using
> the UCSC mapping is probably the best way to go.
>
> database=mm9, search position box = NR_002891
>
> UCSC Genes
>
> NR_002891 (uc008guv.1) at chr19:12979721-12981475 - NR_002891

Although UCSC genes give a unique location. But this is not always
true. UCSC gene corresponds to NM_001025388 also maps to multiple
locations with different exons in each location.

I download the exon table from refFlat. The following refseqs map to
more than one genomic locations and the number of exons are not the
same across the multiple genomic locations.

[1] "NM_001025388" "NM_001099313" "NM_001101644" "NM_001166638" "NM_001166639"
 [6] "NM_001166641" "NM_001170345" "NM_001177538" "NM_001177539" "NM_001177543"
[11] "NM_009286"    "NM_027087"    "NR_002445"    "NR_002883"    "NR_002889"
[16] "NR_002891"    "NR_003596"

In general, can I assume these multiple mapped transcripts with very
different intron/exon structure unreliable? If they map to multiple
genomic locations but the intron/exon structures are the same at these
locations, these mapping should be considered reliable?

> RefSeq Genes (refGene)
>
> NR_002891 at chr19:12979721-12981475
> NR_002891 at chr10:5917375-5943370
>
> (The RefSeq hits are close in score, which is why both were retained. Please
> note that the Methods for the track may have a mistake - we'll get back to
> you about that).
>
> Thanks,
> Jen
>
> ---------------------------------
> Jennifer Jackson
> UCSC Genome Informatics Group
> http://genome.ucsc.edu/
>
> On 4/28/10 2:07 PM, Peng Yu wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> According to ucsc genome browser, NR_002891 maps to the following
>> genomic location. These two mappings show very different number exons.
>> One is 1, the other is 12.
>>
>> I don't understand why a single transcript could come from two genomic
>> location that have very different intro/exon structures. Are these
>> mappings real? Or one of them is an artifact. Or the underlining
>> genome assembly (mm9) is defective at one of these locations?
>>
>> NR_002891 at chr19:12979721-12981475
>> NR_002891 at chr10:5917375-5943370
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>> Peng
>> _______________________________________________
>> Genome maillist  -  [email protected]
>> https://lists.soe.ucsc.edu/mailman/listinfo/genome
>



-- 
Regards,
Peng

_______________________________________________
Genome maillist  -  [email protected]
https://lists.soe.ucsc.edu/mailman/listinfo/genome

Reply via email to