Unconfigured Ad

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • sscd
    Junior Member
    • Aug 2014
    • 3

    #1

    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
  • swbarnes2
    Senior Member
    • May 2008
    • 910

    #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

    • sscd
      Junior Member
      • Aug 2014
      • 3

      #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

      • sscd
        Junior Member
        • Aug 2014
        • 3

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

        Tools (written in C using htslib) for manipulating next-generation sequencing data - samtools/samtools

        Comment

        Latest Articles

        Collapse

        • kinpict.com
          Reply to 16S/ITS Profiling vs. Shotgun Metagenomics: What Changes in Your Workflow?
          by kinpict.com
          The part about this topic feels surprisingly grounded, and the details on the page is the bit that made me slow down. I’d keep <a href="https://kinpict.com/">ai family photo generator</a> bookmarked for later.
          Today, 06:37 PM
        • SEQadmin2
          16S/ITS Profiling vs. Shotgun Metagenomics: What Changes in Your Workflow?
          by SEQadmin2





          NGS has revolutionized clinical microbiology by offering new ways to identify and surveil pathogens without prior knowledge of the target. One popular approach is 16S rRNA and ITS amplicon sequencing, which targets specific microbial markers. But studies are increasingly incorporating shotgun metagenomics, a technique that sequences all DNA from a sample without targeting specific microbial markers. This approach allows more detailed taxonomic classification,...
          10-30-2026, 06:46 AM

        ad_right_rmr

        Collapse

        News

        Collapse

        Topics Statistics Last Post
        Started by SEQadmin2, 11-12-2026, 07:59 AM
        0 responses
        27 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post SEQadmin2  
        Started by SEQadmin2, 11-05-2026, 09:25 AM
        0 responses
        35 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post SEQadmin2  
        Started by SEQadmin2, 11-03-2026, 11:54 AM
        2 responses
        56 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post kinpict.com  
        Started by SEQadmin2, 10-28-2026, 09:57 AM
        0 responses
        175 views
        0 reactions
        Last Post SEQadmin2  
        Working...