Results naming for DADA2 and UNOISE2 about amptk

[nextgenusfs]

Thanks Vladimir. I will make the naming conventions the same. The iSeq name annotation should also work in the taxonomy stage as well so will look into why it does not.

[nextgenusfs]

Hi Vladimir, I just pushed an update to fix this 1506dc4. I also double checked taxonomy is working for both iSeqs and clustered iSeqs. If you are getting 'No hit' still let me know, but if you are it is actually saying there was no taxonomy hit, which could mean that taxonomy prediction has failed or the database that you used was wrong. Let me know if v0.8.8 is now working as you would expect.

[vmikk]

Thank you very much for your reply and a fast fix.
I’m sorry, I should be more specific with “No Hit”.
Last time after UNOISE2 and DADA2 clustering I launched taxonomic classification with:

amptk taxonomy -f unoise.cluster.otus.fa -i unoise.cluster.otu_table.txt …
amptk taxonomy -f dada.cluster.otus.fa -i dada.cluster.otu_table.txt …

Resulting unoise.otu_table.taxonomy.txt was fine (OTUs + their annotation). But in dada.otu_table.taxonomy.txt all taxa had “No Hit”. It’s obvious, because names in dada.cluster.otu_table.txt (iSeq_*) are different from sequences in fasta file (OTU*). So the database was just wrong.

Now, with consistent names after your fix, everything is perfect. Thanks!