Seqanswers Leaderboard Ad

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • alignment view and vcf disagree

    I have a pacbio CCS fastq file that I have aligned to a small (5037 bp) reference which is part of a sequenced BAC clone. I have aligned this data with multiple aligners (minimap2 and smalt), called variants with multiple variant callers (bbmap, freebayes, and gatk) and viewed the bam file with multiple viewers (igv and tablet). All produce similar results. I will focus here on minimap2 and callvariants (bbmap), as the problem likely stems from the variant caller and seqanswers is the preferred avenue for support for bbmap.
    Here is what I did:

    Code:
    minimap2 -t 5 -ax asm20 reference.fa  sample.ccs.fastq > out.sam
    samtools view -O BAM -o out.bam out.sam && samtools sort -o out.sort.bam out.bam && samtools index out.sort.bam
    callvariants.sh ploidy=1 in=out.sort.bam ref=reference.fa vcf=out.vcf
    A partial reading of callvariants log output:
    Code:
    1 of 3311 variants passed primary filters (0.0302%).
    Type            Count   Rate    AD      Depth   AF      Score   Qual
    Substitutions:  0       0.0%    0.0     0.0     0.000   0.0     0.0
    Deletions:      1       100.0%  619.0   1000.0  0.619   23.0    34.0
    Insertions:     0       0.0%    0.0     0.0     0.000   0.0     0.0
    Variation Rate: 1/5037
    Homozygous:     1       100.0%
    The single called variant (a deletion at the site of a homopolymer) is reported in the vcf.
    Code:
    #CHROM  POS     ID      REF     ALT     QUAL    FILTER  INFO    FORMAT  out.sort
    reference       1401    .       Tc      T       23.66   PASS    SN=0;STA=1401;STO=1402;TYP=DEL;R1P=338;R1M=281;R2P=0;R2M=0;AD=619;DP=1000;MCOV=-1;PPC=0;AF=0.6190;RAF=0.6190;LS=2996497;MQS=37140;MQM=60;BQS=21455;BQM=41;EDS=956749;EDM=4467;IDS=617766;IDM=999;NVC=0;FLG=0;CED=601;HMP=6;SB=0.9997    GT:DP:AD:AF:RAF:NVC:FLG:SB:SC:PF        1:1000:619:0.6190:0.6190:0:0:0.9997:23.66:PASS
    To my interpretation of this, a single "c" has been lost from the poly-C which starts at this position. Moreover this deletions occurs in 619 of 1000 reads covering this position.
    Now the strange part. When I view the alignment (out.sort.bam) in IGV (or Tablet), I see at most 1-2% indels at our near this site while the rest of the sequence is largely free of indels. Why is there this large discrepancy between what is observed in an alignment viewer and what is called by the variant caller (i.e. there are many more variant reads called than are observed on the viewer?

    Thank you for your help
    Last edited by Mark; 09-28-2020, 11:37 AM. Reason: Added [code] tags

  • #2
    Turns out the problem was, not surprisingly, in IGV. By default IGV will not show one base pair deletions for what it perceives as PacBio sequence. I had unchecked the "hide indels" box in the 'alignment' preferences but there is a equivalent checkbox in the ' Third Gen' preferences I had overlooked. Uncheck it and viola.

    Comment

    Latest Articles

    Collapse

    • seqadmin
      Essential Discoveries and Tools in Epitranscriptomics
      by seqadmin


      The field of epigenetics has traditionally concentrated more on DNA and how changes like methylation and phosphorylation of histones impact gene expression and regulation. However, our increased understanding of RNA modifications and their importance in cellular processes has led to a rise in epitranscriptomics research. “Epitranscriptomics brings together the concepts of epigenetics and gene expression,” explained Adrien Leger, PhD, Principal Research Scientist on Modified Bases...
      Yesterday, 07:01 AM
    • seqadmin
      Current Approaches to Protein Sequencing
      by seqadmin


      Proteins are often described as the workhorses of the cell, and identifying their sequences is key to understanding their role in biological processes and disease. Currently, the most common technique used to determine protein sequences is mass spectrometry. While still a valuable tool, mass spectrometry faces several limitations and requires a highly experienced scientist familiar with the equipment to operate it. Additionally, other proteomic methods, like affinity assays, are constrained...
      04-04-2024, 04:25 PM

    ad_right_rmr

    Collapse

    News

    Collapse

    Topics Statistics Last Post
    Started by seqadmin, 04-11-2024, 12:08 PM
    0 responses
    55 views
    0 likes
    Last Post seqadmin  
    Started by seqadmin, 04-10-2024, 10:19 PM
    0 responses
    51 views
    0 likes
    Last Post seqadmin  
    Started by seqadmin, 04-10-2024, 09:21 AM
    0 responses
    45 views
    0 likes
    Last Post seqadmin  
    Started by seqadmin, 04-04-2024, 09:00 AM
    0 responses
    55 views
    0 likes
    Last Post seqadmin  
    Working...
    X