VarScan mpileup2snp missing a call - can't figure out why

[eeyun]

VarScan mpileup to snp seems to be missing a call

the mpileup file looks like this...

chr5	13894894	T		40	.a.AAAAAaAA,aaaaA,,aAA,AaaAaAaAaAAa,.,.,	B02/8/0///0G/3/10GH///C/5//0511//10HHH3A	55	a,....Aa,.AAa,aAAA.a,,,,...,,a..,,A,.,.,AaAAaA.aaA.,,,a	!DHHHH0/HH1//H////G/HHGHHGFHH/GGHH/HHHFC////1/G/00FHHH)

Then, I'm using the following options in VarScan

mpileup2snp --min-coverage 20 --min-var-freq 0.2 --min-reads2 4 --strand-filter 1 --output-vcf 1 >whatever.vcf

And this is the line in the VCF where the problem is...

chr5	13894894	.	T	A	.	PASS	ADP=32;WT=1;HET=2;HOM=0;NC=1	GT:GQ:SDP:DP:RD:AD:FREQ:PVAL:RBQ:ABQ:RDF:RDR:ADF:ADR		0/1:53:40:25:11:14:56%:4.7528E-6:33:16:4:7:7:7		0/0:32:55:37:32:5:13.51%:2.706E-2:38:15:15:17:3:2

Attached is an image from IVG of the two alignments (front to back replicates of the same specimen, variant is clearly in both, but not in VCF)

Any thoughts? Apologies is the answer is obvious, but I can't seem to figure it out.

Thanks in advance

[dkoboldt]

Thank you for posting. From the VarScan VCF entry for sample 2:
0/0:32:55:37:32:5:13.51%:2.706E-2:38:15:15:17:3:2

You can see that the VAF as computed by VarScan is 13.51%, which is below your minimum threshold of 20%.

Notably, VarScan depth (DP, field 4) is 37 whereas the raw SAMtools depth (SDP, field 3) is 55. This suggests that the raw pileup and IGV are showing about 18 reads whose base qualities are below VarScan's threshold.

[eeyun]

Originally Posted by dkoboldt

Thank you for posting. From the VarScan VCF entry for sample 2:
0/0:32:55:37:32:5:13.51%:2.706E-2:38:15:15:17:3:2

You can see that the VAF as computed by VarScan is 13.51%, which is below your minimum threshold of 20%.

Notably, VarScan depth (DP, field 4) is 37 whereas the raw SAMtools depth (SDP, field 3) is 55. This suggests that the raw pileup and IGV are showing about 18 reads whose base qualities are below VarScan's threshold.

Thanks very much for the reply.

I had wondered whether this was a result of the base quality being downgraded by samtools, and therefore not read by varscan. I've tried mpileup with -B and -E, but neither seems to make much difference.

It's not a huge issue as overall concordance between the two specimens is very good, but I like to chase down the "misses". I might try a different quality threshold in varscan and see if that helps at all.

[eeyun]

I'm sorry to re-ask the same question again, but I've noticed another missed variant call using the same above pipeline, and this one I can't figure out based on the base qualities. If anyone can point out what I'm missing, I'd really appreciate it.

mpileup at position

chr11	89017961	G	26	..A.A,a....,a....A,,.a,.,,	GG5?5H6GEGGG52GG06FHC6BAHH

As far as I can tell, the variant bases have an average quality of around 20 and the reference bases have an average quality of around 30 (am I wrong?). There should be no strand bias issues.

Yet, using the following VarScan parameters does not yield the variant in the vcf.

--min-coverage 20 --min-var-freq 0.2 --min-reads2 4 --output-vcf 1 --strand-filter 1

Any help greatly appreciated, I'm really lost on this one.