snpeff effect annotation confusion

najoshi

Member

Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 20

snpeff effect annotation confusion

07-07-2021, 02:05 AM

So I am trying to figure out why this particular complex variant was annotated with an effect of "start_lost" when I don't see any evidence of the start codon being changed. Here is the full vcf line:

Code:

chr1	20717668	.	ACGGCAGCGCACGACAACCTTCACCGCCTCGGAGGCCATGGCGCCGCGCCCAGGACCAA	GCGGCAGCGCACGACAACCTTCACCGCCTCGGAGGCCATGGCGCCGCGCCCAGGACCAC	566.598	.	AB=0.347826;ABP=12.2627;AC=5;AF=0.5;AN=10;AO=16;CIGAR=1X57M1X;DP=46;DPB=46.1525;DPRA=0;EPP=5.18177;EPPR=4.16842;GTI=0;LEN=59;MEANALT=1;MQM=60;MQMR=60;NS=5;NUMALT=1;ODDS=5.38955;PAIRED=0.5625;PAIREDR=0.466667;PAO=9;PQA=333;PQR=0;PRO=0;QA=586;QR=1103;RO=30;RPL=13;RPP=16.582;RPPR=31.9633;RPR=3;RUN=1;SAF=7;SAP=3.55317;SAR=9;SRF=8;SRP=17.1973;SRR=22;TYPE=complex;ANN=GCGGCAGCGCACGACAACCTTCACCGCCTCGGAGGCCATGGCGCCGCGCCCAGGACCAC|start_lost|HIGH|KIF17|KIF17|transcript|NM_020816.4|protein_coding|1/15|c.-20_39delTTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGTinsGTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGC|p.MetAlaSerGluAlaValLysValValValArgCysArg1?|340/3961|1/3090|1/1029||,GCGGCAGCGCACGACAACCTTCACCGCCTCGGAGGCCATGGCGCCGCGCCCAGGACCAC|start_lost|HIGH|KIF17|KIF17|transcript|NM_001122819.3|protein_coding|1/15|c.-20_39delTTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGTinsGTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGC|p.MetAlaSerGluAlaValLysValValValArgCysArg1?|340/3958|1/3087|1/1028||,GCGGCAGCGCACGACAACCTTCACCGCCTCGGAGGCCATGGCGCCGCGCCCAGGACCAC|5_prime_UTR_variant|MODIFIER|KIF17|KIF17|transcript|NM_020816.4|protein_coding|1/15|c.-20_39delTTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGTinsGTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGC||||||,GCGGCAGCGCACGACAACCTTCACCGCCTCGGAGGCCATGGCGCCGCGCCCAGGACCAC|5_prime_UTR_variant|MODIFIER|KIF17|KIF17|transcript|NM_001122819.3|protein_coding|1/15|c.-20_39delTTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGTinsGTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGC||||||,GCGGCAGCGCACGACAACCTTCACCGCCTCGGAGGCCATGGCGCCGCGCCCAGGACCAC|5_prime_UTR_variant|MODIFIER|KIF17|KIF17|transcript|NM_001287212.2|protein_coding|1/15|c.-447_-389delTTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGTinsGTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGC|||||2098|,GCGGCAGCGCACGACAACCTTCACCGCCTCGGAGGCCATGGCGCCGCGCCCAGGACCAC|downstream_gene_variant|MODIFIER|SH2D5|SH2D5|transcript|NM_001103161.2|protein_coding||c.*4066_*4124delTTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGTinsGTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGC|||||2063|,GCGGCAGCGCACGACAACCTTCACCGCCTCGGAGGCCATGGCGCCGCGCCCAGGACCAC|downstream_gene_variant|MODIFIER|SH2D5|SH2D5|transcript|XM_011541459.2|protein_coding||c.*4066_*4124delTTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGTinsGTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGC|||||2063|,GCGGCAGCGCACGACAACCTTCACCGCCTCGGAGGCCATGGCGCCGCGCCCAGGACCAC|downstream_gene_variant|MODIFIER|SH2D5|SH2D5|transcript|XM_011541460.2|protein_coding||c.*4066_*4124delTTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGTinsGTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGC|||||2063|,GCGGCAGCGCACGACAACCTTCACCGCCTCGGAGGCCATGGCGCCGCGCCCAGGACCAC|downstream_gene_variant|MODIFIER|SH2D5|SH2D5|transcript|XM_011541462.2|protein_coding||c.*4066_*4124delTTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGTinsGTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGC|||||2063|,GCGGCAGCGCACGACAACCTTCACCGCCTCGGAGGCCATGGCGCCGCGCCCAGGACCAC|downstream_gene_variant|MODIFIER|SH2D5|SH2D5|transcript|XM_011541461.2|protein_coding||c.*4066_*4124delTTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGTinsGTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGC|||||2063|,GCGGCAGCGCACGACAACCTTCACCGCCTCGGAGGCCATGGCGCCGCGCCCAGGACCAC|downstream_gene_variant|MODIFIER|SH2D5|SH2D5|transcript|NM_001103160.2|protein_coding||c.*4066_*4124delTTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGTinsGTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGC|||||2063|,GCGGCAGCGCACGACAACCTTCACCGCCTCGGAGGCCATGGCGCCGCGCCCAGGACCAC|intron_variant|MODIFIER|LOC107985528|LOC107985528|transcript|unknown_transcript_1|protein_coding|987/1510|c.167449+904178_167449+904236delTTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGTinsGTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGC||||||WARNING_TRANSCRIPT_MULTIPLE_STOP_CODONS;LOF=(KIF17|KIF17|3|0.67)	GT:DP:AD:RO:QR:AO:QA:GL	0/1:4:3,1:3:111:1:37:-2.49371,0,-9.14896	0/1:9:6,3:6:221:3:109:-13.5154,0,-16.9355	0/1:11:6,5:6:223:5:182:-16.4518,0,-16.8162	0/1:12:8,4:8:294:4:149:-22.2684,0,-21.995	0/1:10:7,3:7:254:3:109:-13.2144,0,-19.5986

The first annotation looks like this:

Code:

GCGGCAGCGCACGACAACCTTCACCGCCTCGGAGGCCATGGCGCCGCGCCCAGGACCAC|start_lost|HIGH|KIF17|KIF17|transcript|NM_020816.4|protein_coding|1/15|c.-20_39delTTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGTinsGTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGC|p.MetAlaSerGluAlaValLysValValValArgCysArg1?|340/3961|1/3090|1/1029||

For some reason it is calling it a deletion & insertion instead of just two separate SNPs. Looking at the two sequences:

Code:

TTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGT
GTGGTCCTGGGCGCGGCGCCATGGCCTCCGAGGCGGTGAAGGTTGTCGTGCGCTGCCGC

you can see that all of the bases are the same except for the first and last bases. The start codon is in the middle, i.e. this variant crosses the 5'UTR to exon 1 boundary. However, the start codon does not change, so why is it being annotated as a "start_lost"?

Tags: hgvs, snpeff, variant annotation

Previous template Next

Nine Things a Sample Prep Scientist Thinks About Before Sequencing

by SEQadmin2

I’m not a sequencing expert. I’m a purification scientist who uses NGS to evaluate workflows my group develops. With this perspective, we think about the sample first and the NGS workflow second. The sequencer is an exceptionally honest reporter, but it can only report on what you give it, so whether you get clean, interpretable data from an NGS workflow is largely determined before you begin.

Here are nine questions we think about, in roughly the order they matter, before...
- Channel: Articles
06-18-2026, 07:11 AM
From Collection to Sequencing: Why Sample Preparation and Preservation Define Sequencing Data

by SEQadmin2

Data variability is still an issue in sequencing technologies despite the advances in reproducibility and accuracy of these platforms. But the problem does not originate in the sequencing itself, but in the previous steps, before the sample reaches the sequencer.

The first step is collection, followed by preservation and sample preparation for analysis. Most scientists overlook those steps, but not being careful might just be skewing the experiment’s results.
...
- Channel: Articles
06-02-2026, 10:05 AM

Topics	Statistics	Last Post
Whole-Genome Sequencing Traces Faroe Islands Ancestry to a North Atlantic Founder Population by SEQadmin2 Started by SEQadmin2, 06-17-2026, 06:09 AM	0 responses 30 views 0 reactions	Last Post by SEQadmin2 06-17-2026, 06:09 AM
Sequencing the Two-Toed Sloth Genome Reveals Jumping Genes Tied to Its Extreme Metabolism by SEQadmin2 Started by SEQadmin2, 06-09-2026, 11:58 AM	0 responses 44 views 0 reactions	Last Post by SEQadmin2 06-09-2026, 11:58 AM
A New Method Makes Hantavirus Genome Analysis Faster and More Accessible by SEQadmin2 Started by SEQadmin2, 06-05-2026, 10:09 AM	0 responses 48 views 0 reactions	Last Post by SEQadmin2 06-05-2026, 10:09 AM
A New Single-Cell Method Maps DNA-Protein Interactions by SEQadmin2 Started by SEQadmin2, 06-04-2026, 08:59 AM	0 responses 50 views 0 reactions	Last Post by SEQadmin2 06-04-2026, 08:59 AM

Unconfigured Ad

snpeff effect annotation confusion

Latest Articles

ad_right_rmr

News