Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • mmanhart
    Member
    • Jan 2013
    • 11

    How does bowtie2 calculate read mapping qualities?

    I'm wondering exactly how bowtie2 calculates the read mapping qualities shown in the output SAM file. The documentation makes it very clear how the internal mapping score is calculated, and how you can customize it (e.g., setting various penalties for mismatches and indels), and it says that this is used to calculate the actual mapping quality, but I can't find anywhere that shows exactly how the mapping quality is ultimately calculated.

    Does it use the same heuristic formula as in MAQ? Here's the paper I know about:

    Li H, Ruan J, Durbin R. (2008) "Mapping short DNA sequencing reads and calling variants using mapping quality scores." Genome Res. 18:1851--1858.

    Many thanks for your help,
    Michael
  • mmanhart
    Member
    • Jan 2013
    • 11

    #2
    Can anyone here help me out? I would really appreciate it!

    Thanks,
    Michael

    Comment

    • sdriscoll
      I like code
      • Sep 2009
      • 436

      #3
      the MAPQ isn't super informative. only got to do with the uniqueness of the alignment where higher scores means more unique. so it's probably a -10*log10(p) where p is some probability of the alignment being unique. I don't know what their probability formula is, however. if this is what they do then the formula isn't a straightforward one like they use in Tophat and STAR.
      /* Shawn Driscoll, Gene Expression Laboratory, Pfaff
      Salk Institute for Biological Studies, La Jolla, CA, USA */

      Comment

      • mmanhart
        Member
        • Jan 2013
        • 11

        #4
        I know what you're saying --- that's all I can find documented in the Bowtie2 manual and publisher paper. However, I would indeed like to see the explicit formula used to calculate this. I find it really striking that it is not documented clearly --- many downstream filters work on mapping quality, so it should be very improtant to know exactly what goes into it.

        Comment

        • sdriscoll
          I like code
          • Sep 2009
          • 436

          #5
          You're right..they should at least put it into words so one can know what they are doing.
          /* Shawn Driscoll, Gene Expression Laboratory, Pfaff
          Salk Institute for Biological Studies, La Jolla, CA, USA */

          Comment

          Latest Articles

          Collapse

          • SEQadmin2
            Advanced Sequencing Platforms Tackle Neuroscience’s Toughest Genomics Problems
            by SEQadmin2



            Genomics studies in neuroscience face a special challenge due to the brain’s complexity and scarcity of samples. Mapping changes in cell type and state using conventional next-generation sequencing methods remains challenging. Advances in technologies like single-cell sequencing, spatial transcriptomics, and long-read sequencing have opened the door to deeper studies of the brain and diseases like Alzheimer’s, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), and schizophrenia.
            ...
            07-09-2026, 11:10 AM
          • SEQadmin2
            Cancer Drug Resistance: The Lingering Barrier to Rising Survival
            by SEQadmin2



            Cancer survival rates have significantly increased in the last few decades in the United States, reaching a combined 70% 5-year survival rate by 2021. Behind this number, there are years of research to find new therapies, drug targets, and early detection methods. But there is one core challenge that keeps slowing down these advances, and it’s about drug resistance.

            There is no single reason why many patients don’t respond to treatment as expected. Cancer is...
            07-08-2026, 05:17 AM
          • GATTACAT
            Reply to Nine Things a Sample Prep Scientist Thinks About Before Sequencing
            by GATTACAT
            Love this - good data definitely starts from good input, and poor input can only give relatively poor data. I particularly like the mention of Nanodrop/absorbance based methods for quantification. It's such a toss up if you'll get an accurate reading or what amounts to a randomly generated number, and a lot of library/sequencing related issues can be traced back to poor quant.
            07-01-2026, 11:43 AM

          ad_right_rmr

          Collapse

          News

          Collapse

          Topics Statistics Last Post
          Started by SEQadmin2, 07-13-2026, 10:26 AM
          0 responses
          27 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Started by SEQadmin2, 07-09-2026, 10:04 AM
          0 responses
          37 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Started by SEQadmin2, 07-08-2026, 10:08 AM
          0 responses
          24 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Started by SEQadmin2, 07-07-2026, 11:05 AM
          0 responses
          34 views
          0 reactions
          Last Post SEQadmin2  
          Working...