# ASVs generates more unassigned taxa rather than OTUs?

**URL:** https://forum.qiime2.org/t/asvs-generates-more-unassigned-taxa-rather-than-otus/18177
**Category:** General Discussion
**Created:** [January 22, 2021, 1:01pm UTC](https://forum.qiime2.org/t/asvs-generates-more-unassigned-taxa-rather-than-otus/18177 "2021-01-22T13:01:23Z")
**Posts on this page:** 2
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![TurboQiimer](https://forum.qiime2.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@TurboQiimer](https://forum.qiime2.org/u/TurboQiimer)
#### Post date: [January 22, 2021, 1:01pm UTC](https://forum.qiime2.org/t/asvs-generates-more-unassigned-taxa-rather-than-otus/18177/1 "2021-01-22T13:01:23Z")

</div>

Hi all,  
I have followed the moving picture tutorial Qiime2. For functional genes, I have got many unassigned taxa. My friend who has used Qiime1 commented to me that "you should not have gotten such a result!2 As we know, Qiime2 produces ASVs via DADA2 and Qiime1 produces OTUs, would it be the case that I got higher unassigned taxa? If yes, is there scientific reasons for that? I would appreciate if you guide me.  
Thanks a lot

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![Nicholas\_Bokulich](https://forum.qiime2.org/user_avatar/forum.qiime2.org/nicholas_bokulich/32/19937_2.png) [@Nicholas\_Bokulich](https://forum.qiime2.org/u/Nicholas_Bokulich)
#### Post date: [January 23, 2021, 8:22am UTC](https://forum.qiime2.org/t/asvs-generates-more-unassigned-taxa-rather-than-otus/18177/2 "2021-01-23T08:22:46Z")

</div>

> [@TurboQiimer](#):
>
> is there scientific reasons for that?

No, probably not. This is probably either a user error or an error with your database. This is an issue I think I already described fairly well here:

> [@Wierd Classification For a Functional Gene](https://forum.qiime2.org/t/wierd-classification-for-a-functional-gene/17668/2):
>
> This sounds like an issue with your reference database (incomplete? poor specificity?), the gene itself (lack of taxonomic resolution?), or the primers (poor specificity?). You should go back and check all three to troubleshoot. Provided the reference database fully covers your amplicons, the vsearch-based classifier in q2-feature-classifier should work well, so we can rule out the classifier.

So either your primers are no good (lots of non-target hits) or your reference data is no good (does not capture the full diversity for your functional gene target).

I think you should do some careful assessment of your reference database and primers before proceeding.