Seqanswers Leaderboard Ad

Collapse

Announcement

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

  • Brian Bushnell
    replied
    Whole-genome sequencing:

    I don't see why indel-calling needs 4x the coverage of SNP-calling; 20x per ploidy seems fine to me for indel-calling, as it does for snp-calling. In fact, I suggest you mention somewhere on the page that the recommendations are for diploid genomes; you state
    The coverage values below apply to most organisms while the read recommendations are for mammalian species with genome sizes of ~3Gb
    but that does not really cover the issue of ploidy.

    For CNVs... "1-8x" coverage seems really low to me. I would reject any data that calls virtually anything at 1x. It's important to mention the difference between amplified and unamplified libraries. I don't think amplified libraries are reliable for CNVs, due to amplification biases and randomness. Most of the time, you will probably see a 2x jump in coverage over a duplicated region using highly-amplified 8-fold coverage data... but I would not stake someone's life on that. The bias is reduced as you decrease the number of amplification cycles, but I don't know of a specific study that has analyzed this effect.

    Whole-exome sequencing:

    Calling a SNP homozygous at 3x coverage will be wrong (purely in terms of hom/het) ~1/8th of the time. I can hardly recommend a process that is wrong 1/8 of the time, though I should mention that when I wrote a variant caller, I got the best results when calling variants as low as 3x coverage. But I still don't recommend it as a guideline for planning things, particularly for exome-capture, which has an inherent ref-bias.

    I had very good luck in calling indels from exome-capture data (consistent in trio studies, etc) but I assume it may be highly bait-system dependent. I only know about the ones that were called successfully, not what was missed, and I assume the ref-bias from baits is much more severe on indels than SNPs. So the recommendation of not selecting exome-capture with the intention of looking for indels seems appropriate. But I would still highly recommend people with exome-capture data to look for indels.

    Transcriptome Sequencing/RNA-seq:

    If people are interested in differential splicing, you should encourage them to use the longest possible reads (and paired reads). Also - the recommendations you have there are for a number of reads; but what is important is the transcriptome coverage, which varies by genome size and % of genome that is coding. I suggest you make your recommendations in terms of transcriptome coverage rather than a set number of reads (which does not consider read length, genome size, or transcriptome size).

    I have not directly used the other categories so I'll defer to those who have.
    Last edited by Brian Bushnell; 05-12-2015, 07:37 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Coverage and Read Depth Recommendations by Sequencing Application

    Genohub is in the process of developing an evolving coverage and read depth guide: https://genohub.com/recommended-sequ...y-application/ based on references in the field. We'd like to ask this community for feedback and references to improve this guide.

    - Genohub

Latest Articles

Collapse

  • seqadmin
    Recent Advances in Sequencing Technologies
    by seqadmin



    Innovations in next-generation sequencing technologies and techniques are driving more precise and comprehensive exploration of complex biological systems. Current advancements include improved accessibility for long-read sequencing and significant progress in single-cell and 3D genomics. This article explores some of the most impactful developments in the field over the past year.

    Long-Read Sequencing
    Long-read sequencing has seen remarkable advancements,...
    12-02-2024, 01:49 PM

ad_right_rmr

Collapse

News

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by seqadmin, Yesterday, 08:24 AM
0 responses
10 views
0 likes
Last Post seqadmin  
Started by seqadmin, 12-12-2024, 07:41 AM
0 responses
8 views
0 likes
Last Post seqadmin  
Started by seqadmin, 12-11-2024, 07:45 AM
0 responses
15 views
0 likes
Last Post seqadmin  
Started by seqadmin, 12-10-2024, 07:59 AM
0 responses
14 views
0 likes
Last Post seqadmin  
Working...
X