Seqanswers Leaderboard Ad

Collapse

Announcement

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

  • Pileup differences with different SAMtools versions

    Hello,

    Generating pileups of bacterial data sets with SAMtools 0.1.18 and 0.1.19, I have noticed differences in the pileup files. Version 0.1.18 produces pileups with greater depth. In both cases, the command line options are identical, just specifying the reference, the sample, and accepting defaults for all other options.

    samtools mpileup -f reference.fasta reads.bam

    Can anyone help explain what is causing the difference and offer best practice recommendations?

    See examples of differences below.

    Thanks!

    samtools 0.1.18 pileup
    seq1 4991 A 29 .C...,,,,,,,,,,,,+1t,..,+1t..tgg.gG !!1!!7@7A>8.0;1<.C@B+?9!#!-!!
    seq1 4992 T 29 G..GG,,,,,,,,,,,,,..,..,,g.cG !90!!7@8@?;13=/4$C@A%>6&%!B!!
    seq1 4993 G 29 A.$.AA,,,,,,,,,,,,,..,..,ac.a. !:1!!05,;@1/.60-,@CB(><-%!A!/
    seq1 4994 G 28 ....,,,,,,,,,,,,,..,..,,a.,. !1!!3>/AE:4,5386A<<283,%!:!*
    seq1 4995 A 29 GTGG,+1t,,+1t,,,,,,,,,,..,..,tg.t.^#c !&!!.:-=E24,5236ADB+<6,&!A!<!
    seq1 4996 T 29 CACC,,,,,,,,,,,,,..,..,c,.c.a !%!!#9$4?-5*2/12>EC(58('3A#:!
    seq1 4997 T 29 ..+5CACCG..,,,,,,,,,,,,,..,..,cc.g.g !%!!&@'>C28AB3=4E64,.,;',;$0!
    seq1 4998 G 29 .$A.$.$,,,,,,,,,,,,,..,..,,,.,.c !!!!+9(1?.,97.3.><;&503)&@*5!
    seq1 4999 G 27 C,,,,,,,,,,,,,..,..,,,.,.c^#, $,B77C:4@B290E424/-;1,7+/!!
    seq1 5000 T 27 .,,,,,,,,,,,,,..,..,,,.,.,g +0B79C87A<190E6?42/;1,?+4!!

    samtools 0.1.19 pileup
    seq1 4991 A 18 .,,,,,,,,,,,,+1t,.... 17@7A>8.0;1<.C@B?9
    seq1 4992 T 19 ..,,,,,,,,,,,,..... 907@8@?;13=/4C@A>6B
    seq1 4993 G 18 .$.,,,,,,,,,,...... :105;@1/.60@CB><A/
    seq1 4994 G 19 .,,,,,,,,,,,,..,... 13>/AE:45386A<<283:
    seq1 4995 A 17 ,+1t,,,,,,,,,,...... .:=E245236ADB<6A<
    seq1 4996 T 16 ,,,,,,,,,....,.. 94?52/12>EC583A:
    seq1 4997 T 17 ,,,,,,,,,,,...,.. @>C28AB3=4E64.;;0
    seq1 4998 G 17 ,,,,,,,,,,....,.. 91?.97.3.><;503@5
    seq1 4999 G 20 ,,,,,,,,,,,,..,.,,.. B77C:4@B290E424/;17/
    seq1 5000 T 22 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,..,..,,.. 0B79C87A<190E6?42/;1?4

  • #2
    At first glance, it looks like the default quality filtering differs between the two, samtools 1.19 is more stringent. The ! in the quality string indicates the lower possible quality, the 1.18 version has many more than the 1.19 version, and the ! correspond to the non-consensus bases, so they are likely wrong anyway, so 1.19 is right in excluding them.

    Comment


    • #3
      @swbarnes, thanks for the quick reply. That certainly explains what I am seeing. I inspected a larger sample and found SAMtools v01.19 is indeed filtering out the read bases with quality < 13.

      Interesting that SAMtools 0.1.18 is not behaving the same as v0.1.19. Both versions mpileup usage show this:

      -Q INT skip bases with baseQ/BAQ smaller than INT [13]

      Comment


      • #4
        Searching around a bit, the SAMtools v0.1.18 behavior when mpileup uses the Q flag is documented here:

        https://github.com/samtools/samtools/wiki/FAQ

        Comment

        Latest Articles

        Collapse

        • 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
        • seqadmin
          Strategies for Sequencing Challenging Samples
          by seqadmin


          Despite advancements in sequencing platforms and related sample preparation technologies, certain sample types continue to present significant challenges that can compromise sequencing results. Pedro Echave, Senior Manager of the Global Business Segment at Revvity, explained that the success of a sequencing experiment ultimately depends on the amount and integrity of the nucleic acid template (RNA or DNA) obtained from a sample. “The better the quality of the nucleic acid isolated...
          03-22-2024, 06:39 AM

        ad_right_rmr

        Collapse

        News

        Collapse

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