Go Back   SEQanswers > Applications Forums > De novo discovery

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Batch effect help ea11 Bioinformatics 5 10-27-2015 07:13 AM
Batch Effect emolinari Bioinformatics 5 06-30-2014 08:09 AM
Batch effect Amative Bioinformatics 3 04-28-2013 04:01 PM
Batch effect, SNPs YKay Genomic Resequencing 0 12-13-2011 05:42 AM

Thread Tools
Old 11-10-2016, 05:59 AM   #1
Junior Member
Location: Switzerland

Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 1
Default batch effect in radseq

Hi all,

We sent 600 samples of a plant species (no reference genome) for DNA-extraction, library prep and ddRadSeq (paired end, Illumina Hiseq). Firstly, 200 samples were sequenced as pilot, then the others 400 followed the same procedure. The raw reads were then:

- Demultiplexed and adepter clipped
- Filtered by restriction enzyme cut site
- Merged and Clusterized using CD-HIT-EST to form the reference contigs
- Quality trimmed
- Aligned against the reference contigs (Bowtie2)
- Variant discovery and SNP called using Freebayes.

Then, many filters were applied to remove less informative SNPs or samples:
- filter out snps with missingness (% of samples with missing data) above 10%
- filter out samples with missingness (% of snps with missing data) above 10%
- filter out snps with minor allele frequency (frequency of the less represented allele) below 5%

This resulted in roughly 500 samples kept and 1500 snps.

The results show a clear batch effect between the samples sequenced as pilot and those sequenced after. Particularly:

- The PCA show a clear separation on the first axis (explaining 3% of the total variance) between pilot and rest of the samples.
- The samples from the pilot show an overall higher level of heterozygosity (12 % in pilot against 9 % rest of samples). This increased observation of heterozygous loci is distributed across many loci.

I've spent a few weeks trying to identify a technical factor that could explain these differences. The most remarkable technical difference I found between the samples is:

- I calculated the median read count for each sample, then compared it between pilot and non-pilot samples. The mean of this parameter is higher in the pilot samples and the variance is half in comparison to the other samples. This is shown in the attached figure (AB: pilot samples, CDEF: other samples).

My questions are:
- Can a differential sequencing depth cause an increase/decrease of heterozygous call in radseq? Is there a read-processing step that could overcome this problem?
- Can you see other possible causes of these batch effects?

thank you in advance

Attached Images
File Type: png urgaange.png (5.6 KB, 7 views)
oselm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2016, 06:43 PM   #2
Registered Vendor
Location: Eugene, OR

Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 523

The higher read count and higher heterozygosity is certainly suggestive, since more reads will give you a better chance to see and call a second allele, or create an error artifact that looks like a second allele. You might re-do the genotype calls and cap the reads at a nucleotide to 20 and see if the difference is reduced.

I'd also look at SNPs per read nucleotide to see if there was a difference in quality scores between runs. The paired-end read seems less consistent so check that closely. You might see an increase in SNP at the end of the read, and a greater increase in the pilot, or a spike at a particular position.
Providing nextRAD genotyping and PacBio sequencing services.
SNPsaurus is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:41 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO