Please note this discussion of choosing the best graphing format:
http://genomewiki.ucsc.edu/index.php/Selecting_a_graphing_track_data_format
Note the discussion of Wiggle Bed Format:
"1. Obsolete data format, use the Bed Graph instead."
Please do not use this bed-4 format input for wiggle_0 types of
tracks. Note this warning on the wiggle format description page:
http://genome.ucsc.edu/goldenPath/help/wiggle.html
"When possible, please use the variableStep or fixedStep data types.
The BED format is the most inefficient format and is not capable
of loading as many data points as the other two formats."
--Hiram
WANG Wuqi wrote:
> Hi Hiram,
>
> When we load a wig format data to encounter below:
>
> $ wigEncode IHG015_no.bed IHG015_no.wig IHG015_no.wib
> Limit of 10,000,000 length specification for bed format at line 2570528,
> found: 20293849)
>
> Head IHG015_no.bed
> -----------------------------------------------------------------.
> [email protected]$ head IHG015_no.bed
> track type=wiggle_0 name="SL003_R00007_IHG015_008_01pg_Count"
> description="SL003_R00007_IHG015_008_01pg_Count" visibility=full
> color=200,100,0 altColor=0,100,200 priority=20
> chr1 0 90 0
> chr1 90 103 1
> chr1 103 173 2
> chr1 173 179 3
> chr1 179 183 4
> chr1 183 198 5
> chr1 198 225 6
> chr1 225 227 7
> chr1 227 232 8
>
>
> $ grep 20293849 IHG015_no.bed
> ------------------------------------------------------.
> chr19 20293844 20293849 164
> chr19 20293849 20293896 163
>
>
> We want to know if this data is generated wrongly,
> how to solve this problem?
>
> Please help
>
>
> Thanks & Regards
>
> Wuqi
>
_______________________________________________
Genome maillist - [email protected]
http://www.soe.ucsc.edu/mailman/listinfo/genome
