Skip to main content
. 2014 Feb 1;7:69. doi: 10.1186/1756-0500-7-69

Table 2.

Quality processing of reads from three Hevea tissue libraries

Latex library
Read number (forward + reverse)
Read size (forward + reverse)
Raw reads
50,384,572 (100%)
5,038,457,200 (100%)
Clean reads
49,393,389 (98.03%)
4,709,104,798 (93.46%)
Paired reads
48,650,932 (96.56%)
4,647,858,661 (92.25%)
Orphan reads (single end)
742,457 (1.47%)
61,246,137 (1.21%)
Leaf library
Read number (forward + reverse)
Read size (forward + reverse)
Raw reads
49,578,322 (100%)
4,957,832,200 (100%)
Clean reads
47,662,360 (96.14%)
4,512,413,782 (91.02%)
Paired reads
46,062,766 (92.90%)
4,373,106,379 (88.21%)
Orphan reads (single end)
1,599,594 (3.23%)
139,307,403 (2.81%)
Bark library
Read number (forward + reverse)
Read size (forward + reverse)
Raw reads
169,887,626 (100%)
16,988,762,600 (100%)
Clean reads
166,258,828 (97.86%)
15,983,753,737 (94.08%)
Paired reads
163,316,702 (96.13%)
15,726,859,825 (92.57%)
Orphan reads (single end) 2,942,126 (1.73%) 256,893,912 (1.51%)