[mira_talk] Re: awkward letters in assembled data
- From: Peter Cock <p.j.a.cock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "mira_talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <mira_talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 23:02:10 +0100
On Thursday, September 29, 2011, John Nash <john.nash@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> On 2011-09-29, at 9:02 PM, Bastien Chevreux <bach@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> On Thursday 29 September 2011 21:31:41 John Nash wrote:
>> > I refuse to assemble data for my bench scientist colleagues unless
there
>> > is quality data. Not my problem if they don't consult with me before
>> > "sending off samples for some sequencing". Followed by "what's a paired
>> > read?" or "20 fold coverage should be enough". Ugh! Uh-oh, I feel a
rant
>> > coming on.
>>
>> *hrhr* Sorry, I just had a déja-vu ... and I feel with you.
>
> The one which sticks in my craw is from a reviewer's comments on
> a grant I co-wrote (paraphrased): "Why is the applicant requesting
> 454 coverage? The amount requested for sequencing is too high.
> Illumina sequencing is sufficient to complete the genome of this
> (edited for privacy) "waterborne eukaryote pathogen"." I wanted
> hybrid coverage.
>
> *sigh*
I hope we don't get the same guy reviewing a genome project
we recently submitted where I too want hybrid coverage...
Peter
Other related posts:
