Megahit was easy to install and it ran very quickly on large datasets.
We thought it seems like a fine approach for a low-complexity dataset. For my data, though, Megahit assembled 12% of the reads from one of my samples, and only 3% of the coassembly using the default settings. Perhaps a better strategy for a high-complexity dataset would be to normalize k-mers using, for example, diginorm or stacks before running megahit meta-large or even an assembler with more options.
We also discussed other assemblers, and decided that it might be best to pick your assembler based on the dataset in question.
Interesting to hear! Have you had a chance to modify the default settings to see how/if you can improve the assembly?
LikeLike
No, I haven’t yet, but I’ll probably do it on Monday. I’ll let you know how it goes!
LikeLike